The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Weekends with Miss Ellany
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

– Is the February cold snap climate modeling’s stagflation? Probably not, but expertise from the comment section is thanked in advance for explaining why. Are there supposed to be days of record breaking low temperatures across huge swaths of the North American continent if the center of the temperature distribution is accelerating its movement towards increasingly warmer temperatures? Is part of the semantic shift from “global warming” to “climate change” a necessary improvement to account for a wider distribution, or is the average temperature distribution not a normal one?

There is something annoyingly unfortunate and harmful to the cause–or poetically just depending on your vantage point–about less reliable methods of power generation like wind and solar having replaced more reliable methods like natural gas and coal fire over the years for the purpose of reducing warming going kaput during an unexpected surge of cold weather and then having to be rescued by the old dirty methods that cause the warming that is inconveniently absent at the moment.

– The Cruz craziness is a good indication of how the establishment is concerned about rogue elements in the junior party positioning themselves as avatars of the working class fighting against the government-corporatist oligarchy. Leaving Texas was a boneheaded move for the senator to make. The optics are terrible. Of course it’s not as though he’d be fixing the power grid if he’d stayed in Houston. That’s what makes in an optical blunder–it exclusively concerns appearances. Beyond the tabloid content, though, it betrays a real growing concern among the ruling class.

– To the bad faith assumption that white gentiles who accept the idea of human biodiversity necessarily believe there is a genetic hierarchy with blacks at the bottom, is it also assumed these people view Asians and Jews as superior to themselves? The thinking is really lazy. That’s what makes it bad faith, I guess. Within the broader category of “HBD realists” there are a subset who believe in racial hierarchies, but do most? Do many? And among those who do, are fertility and survivability the metrics for assessing positions on that hierarchy? These are mostly rhetorical questions, I think.

 
Hide 153 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. songbird says:

    To the bad faith assumption that white gentiles who accept the idea of human biodiversity necessarily believe there is a genetic hierarchy with blacks at the bottom, is it also assumed these people view Asians and Jews as superior to themselves?

    To me the real issue is that they don’t want white gentles thinking about their own genetic interests, and HBD really encourages this view, regardless of the hierarchy of IQ, once you get beyond Murray, who takes a fairly weak position (meant for polite society) and who has denied race before. Though, I understand he is coming out with a new book with “race” in the title.

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
  2. J1234 says:

    To the bad faith assumption that white gentiles who accept the idea of human biodiversity necessarily believe there is a genetic hierarchy with blacks at the bottom, is it also assumed these people view Asians and Jews as superior to themselves? The thinking is really lazy. That’s what makes it bad faith, I guess. Within the broader category of “HBD realists” there are a subset who believe in racial hierarchies, but do most? Do many?

    Lazy thinking is an accurate description. How many people believe that cognitively disabled folks (with Down syndrome, for example) are some lower class of people who must be kept down because of their differences? And how many people think there should be more brain surgeons and airline pilots with Down syndrome?

    Most people are willing to accept the biological realities of disabilities without degrading the value of human life in accordance with such disabilities. They see nothing inconsistent in that because there isn’t anything inconsistent about it.

    • Agree: Gordo
    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Nodwink
  3. These are mostly rhetorical questions, I think.

    Maybe a rhetorical question wants a rhetorical answer.

    Within the broader category of “HBD realists” there are a subset who believe in racial hierarchies, but do most? Do many?

    Like the great-grandfathers of many or most readers, I take a just pride in the uparalleled achievements of my British and European ancestors. However, …

    And among those who do, are fertility and survivability the metrics for assessing positions on that hierarchy?

    I do not know. Perhaps.

    Mainly, I want the European race to stop destroying itself, and to stop ceding its sacred soil without a fight. The ratchet by which

       * my people’s losses go unremarked while
       * my people’s victories are deemed to be violent, supremacist threats

    is radically unacceptable to me.

    According to me, my son is superior to your son, but that’s chiefly because he’s mine. So too with my race. If my race is losing, then I will do what I can to reverse toward victory. I will not in any event duck the problem by pretending that my race did not exist.

    The astonishing fact that such anodyne sentiments as mine should need justification, or should preposterously be pilloried as extreme or paranoid, reveals much about our times.

    • Agree: Lot, Gordo
    • Replies: @Not Only Wrathful
  4. Dr. Doom says:

    This climate change scam is just to dispossess Whites and enrich Oligarchs.
    Wind turbines and solar panels are EXPENSIVE and unreliable.

    That makes them more profitable than cheap reliable energy.
    It also keeps Whites from being able to move around easily.

    The globullist imbeciles want an urban jungle where no one can escape.
    In tiny homes the size of jail cells where you have to work for )))them(((.

    Do not bother trying to reason with these fools.
    They must be destroyed, like a plague virus.

    Quarantined. Removed. Eradicated from society.

    White people have interests they must defend. Against all otherkins.
    IQ has not really been a serious science since the Frankfurt School came in.

    White Western Civilization is at stake.
    You can get your ass to Mars, and Elysium, or be browned out by barbarians.

    The choice is clear. Western Civilization only comes in White.
    It must survive even if ENTIRE POPULATIONS of otherkins need to be eradicated.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @El Dato
  5. Excal says:

    I’m no expert, but Prof. Cliff Mass of the University of Washington is. He is a CO2 warmist, but points out that publicly available data show that extreme weather has become less frequent and less extreme, just as predicted by models.

    He says that the New York Times and other major media sources are simply printing nonsense.

    https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2021/02/is-texas-cold-wave-caused-by-global.html

    “What is most disturbing to me is that so many media outlets are headlining a claim that is so obviously wrong. How can society make rational decisions when the public is being misinformed about such important matters?”

    • Replies: @unit472
  6. MEH 0910 says:
    @songbird

    • Thanks: songbird
  7. Rosie says:
    @J1234

    They see nothing inconsistent in that because there isn’t anything inconsistent about it.

    This!

    God loves us all the same even though we’re not the same. This becomes very easy to understand when we bear in mind that God is our Heavenly Father. I am a mother of numerous children. Some are brighter than others. They are all equally precious to me. It’s not complicated.

  8. There is something annoyingly unfortunate and harmful to the cause–or poetically just depending on your vantage point–about less reliable methods of power generation like wind and solar having replaced more reliable methods like natural gas and coal fire over the years for the purpose of reducing warming going kaput during an unexpected surge of cold weather and then having to be rescued by the old dirty methods that cause the warming that is inconveniently absent at the moment.

    This is not accurate. As I explained in an earlier thread—linking to no fewer than four different articles—it was not wind power alone that failed. Natural gas wellheads were also frozen, which constrained supplies and forced the governor of Texas to prohibit sales of gas for power generation outside the state. Even a nuclear power plant had to be taken offline because it had not been properly winterized.

    And nothing came to the rescue. It isn’t a rescue when 4 million people sit without power for days in freezing weather.

    Looking at this incident through the lens of the renewable energy debate is very incomplete. The real issue is a complete lack of accountability and foresight, and the resulting erosion of our social cohesion and capital base.

    An idled, frozen windmill is not more useless than an idled, frozen nuclear reactor that the plant managers didn’t bother to winterize. It all goes back to the actions of human beings.

    • Replies: @A123
  9. A123 says:

    Is part of the semantic shift from “global warming” to “climate change” a necessary improvement to account for a wider distribution, or is the average temperature distribution not a normal one?

    It is a pure propaganda play, not a fact-based semantic shift.

    Science Deniers need catch phases for their histrionic myths. You can see it in action on magazine covers:
     

     
    — In the 70’s and 80’s — There are only TEN years to save the planet from Global Cooling. When the deadline for that fiction passed they had to come up with something new.

    — In the 90’s and 00’s — There are only TEN years to save the planet from Global Warming. When the deadline for that fiction passed they had to cone up with something new.

    — In the 10’s and 20’s — There are only TEN years to save the planet from Climate Change. When the deadline for that fiction passes they will again attempt to pivot again to something new.

    Fortunately, huge numbers of people have spotted the fact that these deadlines keep passing and the consequences never appear. The “Boy Who Cried Wolf” and the “Science Deniers Who Cried Climate Crisis” share the same lack of credibility.

    Is WUHAN-19 Virus hysteria the next artificial crisis intended to succeed the Climate Change myth? The timing is quite convenient.
    ____

    Globalist Elites use Cooling / Warming / Change Science Denial to manipulate government priorities towards their desired Anti-U.S. goals. How much wealth has the SJW Elite class transferred from American Workers to other nations (like China) by artificially making U.S. energy less available and more expensive?

    As an added feature, the Globalist Elites have advance knowledge of what bogus technology will be pushed. This lets them set-up companies to funnel money into their own pockets. Look at the Obama/Biden administration’s self dealing: (1)

    The [Solyndra] controversy over a bankrupt, government-funded, solar-panel firm the White House backed, in a nutshell.

    The Facts: In August 2009, [Obama’s] White House staff repeatedly asked Office of Management and Budget (OMB) officials about the status of a $535 million loan to the solar-panel manufacturer Solyndra. … The company filed for bankruptcy [in 2011]. Two days later, the FBI raided its offices in Delaware, refusing to discuss details of the investigation.
    ….
    OMB officials privately said they felt pressured to approve the loan prematurely. White House officials made their inquiries to OMB just weeks before Vice President Biden announced the loan at a ground-breaking ceremony in September, part of his long campaign to promote stimulus-spending projects across the country.

    The Populists need to finish wresting control of the GOP away from the Establishment Swampies. That will leave it in a position to crush the Anti-Worker DNC/CCP party.

    PEACE 😇
    ___________

    (1) https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/09/the-solyndra-scandal-what-it-is-and-why-it-matters/245186/

  10. A123 says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    An idled, frozen windmill is not more useless than an idled, frozen nuclear reactor that the plant managers didn’t bother to winterize. It all goes back to the actions of human beings.

    ID,

    You are missing a crucial distinction between two very different situations:

    -1- Mistakes that can be fixed.
    -2- Technologies that are inherently uncorrectable.

    Failing to properly winterize the nuclear plant was a baaaaadddd mistake. This can be fixed by making the necessary plant upgrades. The remediation exists 100% within known & proven technology.

    What is your solution to winterize the wind turbines?

    If wind & solar cannot be made reliable, the only option to guarantee resiliency is sharply limiting the amount of inherently fragile and unreliable technology on the grid.

    PEACE 😇

  11. @A123

    I’m not in favor of wind turbines. I’m just saying that the traditional generating capacity fared little better than the alternative generating capacity, and this was due to human neglect. To the people who froze to death, it makes no difference whether the electricity they weren’t getting was supposed to have been generated from wind or natural gas. There were failures all over the place.

    The time for debating the relative merits of wind was back when we actually had a surplus and a functioning society. Now we are past the point where it does any good to point out that wind power was a bad idea to begin with (which it was). We are incapable of building back better even if we committed to using nothing but reliable carbon fuels from now on. We no longer have the wherewithal nor the organizational capacity.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  12. @V. K. Ovelund

    If you had a son with a woman of a different ethnicity, would “your” son be inferior for you than the son of two other people of your own ethnicity?

    Of course there’s nothing wrong with having a strong attachment to both – or rather, your attachment would be just your attachment and therefore an unavoidable fact, but this type of question does need to be answered.

    The other son would be more genetically similar to you, so would you prefer them? What if both were raised away from you?

    I suspect the vast majority of people would be far more attached to their own actual son. Or at least they would say they would be, and they would give a spiritual explanation if prompted. Is that just a cope by them?

    Or, as I think, is it genuine and because almost no one in the world has anything but the tiniest sliver of actual loyalty to a race? In that they’ll make essentially no sacrifices for it and this has always been true.

    I say this because you use “your people” as a synonym for “race”, but “race” is only one factor in how most classify “their people”. I don’t even feel it is a big factor and instead in history has only been mostly correlative. Or maybe I am being pedantic and actually all of those wars that have occurred within races were big because ” hatred” is closer to “love” than “love” is to “indifference”. Or was it all just proximity and actually the whole world secretly thinks like you do, but constantly disguises it?

    Again, would you prefer a random white boy over your own mixed race son?

  13. Talha says:

    And among those who do, are fertility and survivability the metrics for assessing positions on that hierarchy?

    If not, they certainly should be. All other attributes; strength, intelligence, speed, height, etc. have no intrinsic value in and of themselves if they do not correlate to better survival chances. You may not like the fact that Pygmies are short, but if they end up being the 75% of the population (after, say starting out even with non-Pygmies) in a region after some time, they obviously are better adapted for the environment from a biological perspective. I don’t know how one can argue against it. Sure they may lead down a Malthusian trap in that same environment, but if they are the only ones around, it really doesn’t matter…they just did less worse than everyone else. My family and I watched one of those cooking shows where they had a group of people start the season and then one by one the people get eliminated every episode. You realize that some people who made it further were not as talented as the others the other really good guys would often make a mistake or get too ambitious and have a bad day and get eliminated. My kids would get very frustrated with that because the people they were rooting for would often get dumped. But there is a life lesson to be learned from observing that phenomenon, to stay in the game sometimes you just have to consistently be the not-worse in order to avoid elimination.

    Also, of interest; victimhood-mentality is correlated with unethical patterns of behavior…surprised?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
  14. @Not Only Wrathful

    If you had a son with a woman of a different ethnicity, would “your” son be inferior for you than the son of two other people of your own ethnicity?

    Come, what do you think?

    Of course there’s nothing wrong with having a strong attachment to both – or rather, your attachment would be just your attachment and therefore an unavoidable fact, but this type of question does need to be answered.

    The tactful way in which you phrase the question is noted, yet nevertheless …

    No, I don’t believe that this type of question does need to be answered. It has already been answered by whites, year after year, decade after decade, ad nauseam. It has ceased to be a real question a long time ago.

    [MORE]

    When do nonwhites get asked such questions?

    I suspect the vast majority of people would be far more attached to their own actual son. Or at least they would say they would be, and they would give a spiritual explanation if prompted. Is that just a cope by them?

    Okay, this is a better question.

    Your great-grandfather would hardly have been conflicted about which outside stocks were more assimilable and which, less; but European man can, and has, and will, absorb a limited genetic admixture from outside and remain European. In the aggregate, though, the less admixture, the better, for a program of ever-increasing admixture can end only one way: in the end of European man.

    Regarding coping, I don’t think that it’s a cope. I think that it is that man’s son; and on an individual level I don’t think that it’s any of my business. On an individual level, I get along with practically everybody. Don’t you?

    But no other race is being asked to admix itself out of existence. Only whites.

    A meta-observation, not especially directed at you: it is plain that more than a few readers here are puzzled that someone who appears to be as moderate as I do could hold views that lie so far outside the mainstream. Does that indict me, or does it indict the mainstream?

    Before answering, consider what your great-grandfather would say. He wasn’t stupid, after all: he managed to sire and raise the line that led to you.

  15. @Intelligent Dasein

    … wind power was a bad idea to begin with …

    Was it? I didn’t know that.

    I ask you because you are a serious person who gives serious answers. Generally, admittedly, I tuned out the public political chatter regarding wind power a long time ago—for the same reason that I later tuned out the public political chatter regarding climate change and, nowadays, regarding facemasks.

    Has a competent, reasonable engineer with sound judgment and no axe to grind analyzed the wind-power problem? If he has, his analysis has not reached me through all the noise.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  16. @V. K. Ovelund

    … could hold views that lie so far outside the mainstream.

    I should have written, “outside the putative mainstream.”

    When the putative mainstream ceases [a] blatantly to contradict what our great-grandfathers so recently believed and [b] incessantly to receive reinforcement via a torrent of novel media/educational propaganda, then I will drop the adjective.

    I doubt that, deep down, many right-of-center white Americans really believe all this racial-egalitarian nonsense. If they did, they wouldn’t keep fleeing, say, California for Idaho. It seems that they mainly just do not know how to untangle the knot, so to speak.

  17. @V. K. Ovelund

    Has a competent, reasonable engineer with sound judgment and no axe to grind analyzed the wind-power problem? If he has, his analysis has not reached me through all the noise.

    Here is a recent article about the Texas situation that fits that description. It’s not a comprehensive discussion of wind power, just a response to Texas; but it was written by a competent and seemingly level-headed engineer.

    Assigning Blame for the Blackouts in Texas

    • Thanks: Mark G.
    • Replies: @anon
    , @A123
  18. unit472 says:
    @Excal

    I enjoy watching the Weather Channel ( until Carl Parker or Rick Knab take off their meteorologist hats and become ‘Climate Change” apostles). Meteorologists do a good job of predicting the weather out to about 10 days because they can observe the global atmosphere in real time and it takes about 10 days for a weather system in the Central Pacific to migrate to the East coast of the United States or a tropical wave off the west coast of Africa to reach the the SE US. The former can bring rain or snow and the latter spawn a hurricane. Meteorologists, using space based satellites, do a good job forecasting our weather. They have absolutely no expertise or technology to enable them to predict future climate and yet our political leadership has swallowed, hook, line and sinker, a BELIEF that atmospheric CO2 must be reduced.

    Policy decisions based on this inchoate and unverified BELIEF is one part of what led to the disaster in Texas. The other part was the deregulation of the electric power system. You don’t allow allow Wall St. traders ( or an Enron) to place bets on the price of electricity. Electricity supply has to match demand at all times. There must be no market in electricity ‘options’. CASIO, ERCOT , PJM and other grid managers must be allowed to offer a price that will keep their systems supplied at all times under all conditions. That price will only be offered to generators who have ‘dispatchable’ electric power not windmills or solar generation.

  19. Nodwink says:
    @J1234

    Israel’s military is now using recruits with Down Syndrome. Or one, at least (Elad Goldsteiger).

  20. El Dato says:
    @Dr. Doom

    About this:

    If, as the Buddhists suggest, we should ‘drive all blames into one,’ we may as well blame the Great Reset for our dystopia

    Wind turbines and solar panels are EXPENSIVE and unreliable.

    I don’t know about wind turbines but solar panels are pretty reliable and have their uses. If you can pull a fat percentage of domestic energy use directly from the sun – why not? It’s called “de-centralization”. I want it.

    Tomorrow’s Power Grid Will Be Autonomous

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @Mr. Rational
  21. SafeNow says:

    For a week or two before the freeze, reputable meteorologists identified an unprecedented number of pre-freeze red flags, and did their best to warn the people who could have taken precautions. Admiral Nimitz, concluding his report on the tragic “Halsey Hurricane” of WWII, put it this way: “It is dangerous to be grudging about safety precautions for fear that they might turn out to have been unnecessary.” The “grudging problem” identified by Nimitz has become more severe since the advent of the internet, which lies about like a loaded weapon ready to shame you for precautions that turned out to have been unnecessary. Examples of failing to take precautions abound. Counter-examples exist exactly where you would expect to find them.

  22. Rosie says:
    @Not Only Wrathful

    If you had a son with a woman of a different ethnicity, would “your” son be inferior for you than the son of two other people of your own ethnicity?

    What he’s telling you is precisely that he wouldn’t have a child with a woman of another ethnicity, so this is a contrived question.

    almost no one in the world has anything but the tiniest sliver of actual loyalty to a race? In that they’ll make essentially no sacrifices for it and this has always been true.

    I grow ever more convinced that this is true, and it does not bode well for the future of human diversity, which, unlike SJWs, I actually value a great deal.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Not Only Wrathful
  23. neutral says:

    there are a subset who believe in racial hierarchies, but do most? Do many? And among those who do, are fertility and survivability the metrics for assessing positions on that hierarchy? These are mostly rhetorical questions, I think.

    If you don’t believe in hierarchies, then you believe that blacks are equivalent to whites in civilizational achievements, which is clearly total bullshit.

  24. Talha says:
    @Rosie

    almost no one in the world has anything but the tiniest sliver of actual loyalty to a race? In that they’ll make essentially no sacrifices for it and this has always been true.

    I grow ever more convinced that this is true, and it does not bode well for the future of human diversity…

    Race, as is currently formulated, is fairly recent in consideration; most pre-modern people thought in terms of tribes or ethno-linguistic terms. Certainly, the success of universalist had to do with the trajectory you are speaking about.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @V. K. Ovelund
  25. Talha says:
    @Talha

    …universalist religions…

    (Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, etc.)

  26. @Talha

    Race, as is currently formulated, is fairly recent in consideration; most pre-modern people thought in terms of tribes or ethno-linguistic terms.

    Probably. This doesn’t obviate the point, though. It reïnforces it, rather.

    In the United States, the relevant discriminant is race.

    I didn’t get sacked at the university for being English or Scotch or Dutch or whatever. I got sacked for being a European white.

    • Agree: Rosie
    • Replies: @Talha
  27. @A123

    What is your solution to winterize the wind turbines?

    Turbines in colder places are typically equipped with de-icing and other tools, such as built-in heating. In Texas, where the weather is almost never this cold, they usually are not.

    In cold climates turbines are equipped with “cold weather packages” that allow them to operate in temperatures down to minus 22 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 30 Celsius). To prevent icing on rotor blades heating and water-resistant coatings are used.

    Why Wind Turbines In Cold Climates Don’t Freeze

    Failing to properly winterize the nuclear plant was a baaaaadddd mistake.

    Failing to properly winterize the natural gas wells and pipelines was a bigger mistake.

    • Replies: @A123
  28. Talha says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Yes, this new concept of race is causing all sorts of issues. It’s like a shiny new toy in the hands of a toddler; does he play with it or shove it in his mouth…?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  29. @Rosie

    What he’s telling you is precisely that he wouldn’t have a child with a woman of another ethnicity, so this is a contrived question

    People do a lot of things they say they wouldn’t

  30. It isn’t white people so much as old Western Civ, an amalgam of a belief system developed in the semitic, non white Med area but put to it’s most practical social application in the cold, white North by people of different breeds. That Western Civ is no longer a vital force, decrepit and decadent. The white people are no longer applying their unique (among the 7 or so big races) inbred talents because they have lost interest. It will not likely be regained.

    Not with a bang, but a whimper.

  31. A123 says:
    @Adam Smith

    To prevent icing on rotor blades heating and water-resistant coatings are used.

    Coating? Interesting. If all of the blades do not shed accumulation at the same rate, that can lead to a destructive out-of-balance wobble. Any coating would have to be inspected and potentially reapplied on a regular basis.

    Have you seen anything on Cost (Initial and Maintenance) for the coating based solution?

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Adam Smith
  32. Mark G. says:

    It’s likely that questioning climate change in the future will be added to the category of “disinformation” and attempts will be made to suppress discussion of it in the same way anyone opening discussing the recent election results, the effectiveness of Covid vaccines, or genetic racial differences are increasingly being suppressed.

    Rather than direct government censorship, this will be done indirectly. There will be more things like when AOC tweeted out that something needs to be done about Parler and more congressional hearings where the heads of companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google are required to appear and where they will then be pressured to do the government’s censorship for it. Lurking in the background will be the possibility of government retaliation if they don’t. The antitrust laws have been used in recent years to target companies who won’t do what they are told. In the case of companies like Google, Facebook and Twitter there is also the possibility they can be taken out of the category of platform and put in the category of publisher. They are frightened of this because they would then be subject to libel laws and would have to spend large sums of money fending off numerous lawsuits.

    • Replies: @SafeNow
  33. nebulafox says:
    @El Dato

    Teaching people how the grid works or how nuclear plants work on a more grassroots level might be useful.

    I’ve got nothing against solar power: real problem with solar isn’t the technology so much as the economic integration, IIRC, In any case, I think the Middle East’s role in Western European/American foreign policy should be a huge warning against having your eggs stuck in one energy basket, renewable or otherwise.

    But having lived in the parts of the US where the Keystone Pipeline is going through, I can vouch for the fact that the weather there can be troublesome. John Kerry’s proposal to retool Keystone workers to solar plants in places like Nebraska or the Dakotas come off as really out-of-touch with this reality, to put it mildly. I don’t know much about geothermal energy: I’m sure it has problems that I’m unfamiliar with, and I would happy to be instructed on that by any commentator who knows better, but it doesn’t seem to be as tied into local weather conditions as solar or wind is. I don’t pretend to be an expert, but seems wise to just have as many sources as possible, so that if something goes haywire on one, you don’t get hurt too bad.

    That all being said, anybody who whines about the environment while being staunchly anti-nuclear power is either too stupid/too ideological to be worth wasting your time on, or has a covert agenda more about reducing living standards (of course, these people have never experienced the grinding misery of the developing world as they wax on from gated communities on how the peasants should live) than anything related to long-term human sustainability. We can debate endlessly what might work 50 years from now, but we also have immediate realities to deal with. The developing world wants to have the same things the developed world has, and nuclear plants are an integral part of securing that while not screwing over the developed world: as countries like China, India, and Indonesia, to their credit, have figured out. And this should be of interest to the commentariat here. As important as growing a backbone on immigration in the short-term is, long-term, the only way to stop people from coming to the developed world is to make the developing world a more pleasant place to live. Africa is going to make everything pale in comparison. Time to start planning ahead.

    I’ve always admired France’s nuclear achievements, truth be told: it’s what, 3/4ths? Wish the US were less at the whim of irrational gerontocratic greenies here. And Democrats never, ever believe it when I tell them about France’s success with nuclear energy. It’s really funny how left-wing American stereotypes of Europe can be just as wrong as the right-wing counterparts.

  34. @Talha

    You are not being argumentative, so I do not wish to be, either. Nevertheless:

    Yes, this new concept of race is causing all sorts of issues. It’s like a shiny new toy in the hands of a toddler; does he play with it or shove it in his mouth…?

    For the white American Gentile to abandon the concept of race now that the concept has been weaponized against him would be an act of unilateral disarmament. As early as 1790, U.S. federal statues explicitly mentioned “white persons.” Your and my speculations 231 years later regarding the abstract value of race as a concept thus have little practical effect.

    Here is Edward Gibbon in 1782:

    Within less than a century, the irresistible Zingis, and the Mogul princes of his race, spread their cruel devastations and transient empire from the Sea of China, to the confines of Egypt and Germany.

    [MORE]

    For readers who have the taste for it, here is a lengthier passage by the same author in the same year:

    If the geographical accuracy of Ammianus had been fortunately bestowed on the British exploits of Theodosius, we should have traced, with eager curiosity, the distinct and domestic footsteps of his march. But the tedious enumeration of the unknown and uninteresting tribes of Africa may be reduced to the general remark, that they were all of the swarthy race of the Moors; that they inhabited the back settlements of the Mauritanian and Numidian province, the country, as they have since been termed by the Arabs, of dates and of locusts; and that, as the Roman power declined in Africa, the boundary of civilized manners and cultivated land was insensibly contracted. Beyond the utmost limits of the Moors, the vast and inhospitable desert of the South extends above a thousand miles to the banks of the Niger. The ancients, who had a very faint and imperfect knowledge of the great peninsula of Africa, were sometimes tempted to believe, that the torrid zone must ever remain destitute of inhabitants; and they sometimes amused their fancy by filling the vacant space with headless men, or rather monsters; with horned and cloven-footed satyrs; with fabulous centaurs; and with human pygmies, who waged a bold and doubtful warfare against the cranes. Carthage would have trembled at the strange intelligence that the countries on either side of the equator were filled with innumerable nations, who differed only in their color from the ordinary appearance of the human species: and the subjects of the Roman empire might have anxiously expected, that the swarms of Barbarians, which issued from the North, would soon be encountered from the South by new swarms of Barbarians, equally fierce and equally formidable. These gloomy terrors would indeed have been dispelled by a more intimate acquaintance with the character of their African enemies. The inaction of the negroes does not seem to be the effect either of their virtue or of their pusillanimity. They indulge, like the rest of mankind, their passions and appetites; and the adjacent tribes are engaged in frequent acts of hostility. But their rude ignorance has never invented any effectual weapons of defence, or of destruction; they appear incapable of forming any extensive plans of government, or conquest; and the obvious inferiority of their mental faculties has been discovered and abused by the nations of the temperate zone. Sixty thousand blacks are annually embarked from the coast of Guinea, never to return to their native country; but they are embarked in chains; and this constant emigration, which, in the space of two centuries, might have furnished armies to overrun the globe, accuses the guilt of Europe, and the weakness of Africa.

    In view of such examples, one is reluctant to credit the suggestion that race were a novel concept. It does not in fact seem to be.

    • Replies: @Talha
  35. @A123

    Unfortunately I cannot figure out the cost of the “cold weather packages” either as an original upgrade or a retrofit. The cost of a 2MW turbine is approximately $4 million installed on land. The only references I can find about price of icephobic and hydrophobic coatings are quite vague. Most companies simply use terms like “cost effective”, which on a 4 million dollar turbine could still be pretty expensive. One company offers blades heated with hot air and says “the technology would have required Caribou to replace 99 blades at a cost in the tens of millions of dollars.” Not quite what I’m looking for.

    I agree with you that the blades would have to shed ice at a very similar rate to remain in balance and that coatings would have to be applied properly, inspected regularly and reapplied periodically. It might not be cost effective in Texas.

    I do wonder if there would be a benefit to manufacturing the blades in dark green or black that would absorb sunlight to provide passive deicing. I imagine they’re white for visibility, I suppose so small aircraft don’t crash into them. They would probably look less obtrusive on the horizon if they were flat black instead of shiny white. Perhaps there is a more important reason they don’t come in different colors? Perhaps not?

    Can Painting Wind Turbine Blades Black Really Save Birds?

    Number of birds killed by wind turbines drops by 72 per cent when a single blade is painted black, study finds

    Should We Paint Wind Turbines Black For Black History Month?

  36. SafeNow says:
    @Mark G.

    I agree that the tech companies will suppress dissenting information about climate change. I will add this to your point: Much dissenting information will exist in academia. A junior professor who is assembling his curriculum, or writing an article, will feel career pressure to remove or adjust dissenting information.

    • Agree: dfordoom
  37. raga10 says:

    are fertility and survivability the metrics for assessing positions on that hierarchy?

    I should hope not, otherwise Australian aborigines would be right at the top of the tree having survived for a very, very long time and being quite good at breeding when conditions allow.
    Unfortunately, they are dumb as bricks.

  38. raga10 says:
    @nebulafox

    Yes, sources of energy should be varied, rather than made a political issue. Nobody should be all for solar, or all for nuclear energy – they are just means to an end, not ideologies!
    Solar is great where there is a lot of sun, for example in the Middle East. Nuclear is definitely not a good idea in places with a lot of tectonic activity such as Japan, but it is otherwise a very good source of energy… Horses for courses.

  39. Cruz should have sent his kids to Cancun & volunteered at a food bank. Seeing AOC make hay of this is making me sick.

    • Agree: SafeNow
    • Replies: @raga10
    , @nebulafox
  40. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Not Only Wrathful

    Or, as I think, is it genuine and because almost no one in the world has anything but the tiniest sliver of actual loyalty to a race? In that they’ll make essentially no sacrifices for it and this has always been true.

    I say this because you use “your people” as a synonym for “race”, but “race” is only one factor in how most classify “their people”. I don’t even feel it is a big factor

    Race is too vague to mean anything to anybody. Do you think anybody would make sacrifices for the Asian race? Of course not. A Japanese person might be prepared to make sacrifices for the Japanese people but he certainly isn’t going to make sacrifices for something as nebulous as a mythical Asian race? Does anybody feel any burning loyalty to something as meaningless as the Hispanic race?

    Did any of the millions of people who fought and died in countless European wars do so for the sake of the “white race”? Of course not. Did they fight and die for Europe? Of course not. They fought and died for France, or for Poland, or for Germany.

    Even national loyalties were not strong enough to stop Europeans from butchering each other over religious and ideological disputes.

    We do feel some loyalties to “our people” but “our people” can mean our ethnic group, our cultural group, our religion or even our political party or or social class.

    Racial loyalties are so weak as to be practically non-existent, because most people (quite correctly) see race as hopelessly abstract and vague and essentially meaningless. It has no emotional resonance for anybody.

  41. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    Drinking black coffee has also been associated with “dark triad” behaviors by a peer-reviewed study; https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0195666315300428 and see https://wmbriggs.com/post/17047/ , so I’m not sure how far this particular study goes towards confirming my own preconceptions on the subject (with, which, however, it tends to agree, generally speaking).

    [MORE]

    Be sure you do not perform your acts of piety before men, for them to watch; if you do that, you have no title to a reward from your Father who is in heaven. Thus, when thou givest alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in synagogues and in streets, to win the esteem of men. Believe me, they have their reward already. But when thou givest alms, thou shalt not so much as let thy left hand know what thy right hand is doing, so secret is thy almsgiving to be; and then thy Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward thee. And when you pray, you are not to be like hypocrites, who love to stand praying in synagogues or at street-corners, to be a mark for men’s eyes; believe me, they have their reward already. But when thou art praying, go into thy inner room and shut the door upon thyself, and so pray to thy Father in secret; and then thy Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward thee.

    (Matthew 6:1-6)

    Between what matters and what seems to matter, how should the world we know judge wisely?

    (Trent’s Last Case)

    • Replies: @Talha
  42. dfordoom says: • Website
    @V. K. Ovelund

    But no other race is being asked to admix itself out of existence. Only whites.

    That’s simply not true. “Race mixing” is weakening and will eventually destroy every currently existing racial/ethnic/cultural identity.

    The Japanese have been subjected to pressure from the US and from the corporate sector to admix themselves out of existence. So far they’ve resisted but there’s no question that the intention is to destroy the Japanese as a distinct ethnic/cultural group.

    Interestingly enough, Jewish identity is slowly being destroyed in the US by out-marriage.

    The objective of diversity is to destroy diversity and to create a global monoculture. That’s bad for everyone.

    The concept of a White Race is itself destructive – it encourages the destruction of distinctive ethnic and cultural identities.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  43. anon[764] • Disclaimer says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    That article is very useful, because it discusses the regulatory environment of the Texas power pool as well as physical elements of it. I suggest bookmarking it, possibly saving it.

    The fashionable solution in the Current Year to the transitory nature of wind / solar is to create very large banks of batteries. Literal warehouses full of lithium cells stacked up 3 meters or so high. These batteries are to be charged up with surplus electricity, and then drawn down after dark / when the wind dies down.

    It is a solution that works well in micro applications such as flashing lights for traffic signs, remote installations and even individual dwellings in some locales. Applying it to even a rather small base load community – say, 500,000 households / stores – is not yet tested. But it’s gonna require a whole lot of lithium.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
  44. dfordoom says: • Website
    @nebulafox

    That all being said, anybody who whines about the environment while being staunchly anti-nuclear power is either too stupid/too ideological to be worth wasting your time on, or has a covert agenda more about reducing living standards

    I agree. A sane energy policy has to include nuclear power.

    The developing world wants to have the same things the developed world has, and nuclear plants are an integral part of securing that while not screwing over the developed world: as countries like China, India, and Indonesia, to their credit, have figured out.

    Again I agree.

    At this point in time nuclear power is absolutely essential.

    The advantage of nuclear power and natural gas over “renewable energy” is that we have the technology to make nuclear power and natural gas safe and reliable and reasonably cheap. We do not have the technology to make “renewable energy” cheap or reliable. Nuclear power and natural gas work.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  45. raga10 says:
    @Paperback Writer

    Seeing AOC make hay of this is making me sick.

    He did a shameful thing, and he should be shamed; AOC might be ‘making hay’ but everyone should join her rather than try to defend him. No, he would not fix the grid personally, but leaders are supposed to lead – by example if nothing else. The buck stops with him, that’s the nature of leadership – if you can’t deal with that, don’t run for the office.

  46. Talha says:
    @RSDB

    Ah ha!!! So chai-drinkers like me were right about our suspicions!

    Beautiful quotes about the need for sincerity in worship – much appreciated!

    Peace.

  47. A123 says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    A better write-up of the issues can be found here:

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2021/02/what-happened-in-texas.php

    And here:

    https://www.americanexperiment.org/2021/02/wind-energy-fails-grading-the-reliability-of-energy-sources-during-the-texas-power-outages/
    ____

    While one nuclear reactor did shutdown, it was still the *most reliable* electricity source during the weather event.
     
     

    Solar and Wind did much worse than Nuclear and Hydrocarbons (coal, gas).

    PEACE 😇

  48. nebulafox says:
    @Paperback Writer

    Cruz ****ed up, and bad. I’ve always had a dim opinion of his electability on a national level, but I never thought he was stupid. Well, guess what…

    Look, it doesn’t matter if him being in Texas organizing winter relief wouldn’t have solved anything concrete: highly unlikely given Senatorial influence, but still. The symbolism is enough of a motive on its own in a political era where symbolism basically has become policy. This kind of crap from the GOP is *exactly* why the Democrats can get elected with the woke nonsense in the first place. Until this goes away (and after the Trump experience, people are probably gonna wanna hear specific promises: Establishment bashing alone won’t cut it), the Democrats can nominate baked potatoes and neocons, and still win. Nobody wants to hear more McConnellist selective libertarianism that wants to absolve Jeff Bezos of taxes while he takes small business destruction to a global level, as the good people of India are finding out.

    What people are coming to dislike about our governing class, more than anything else, is the mix of petty ham-handed schoolmarm authoritarianism with the simultaneous abdication of any responsibility or noblesse oblige-or even the willingness to talk in concrete, specific terms about any policy measures. Never have you seen a bunch so dedicated to getting power, by any means necessary, while being less interested in doing any serious work with that power.

    • Agree: dfordoom, iffen
    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    , @Talha
  49. Deregulation and privatization caused the blackout in Texas, not “alternative energy.”

    You diversionary shills.

  50. @dfordoom

    I have not come destroy any identities. Whites are going extinct.

    The concept of a White Race is itself destructive – it encourages the destruction of distinctive ethnic and cultural identities.

    We lack time for such trimming.

  51. @nebulafox

    It seems that plenty of persons in this thread think that Sen. Cruz has offended someone else. On the other hand, I see not one soul here whom Cruz has actually offended.

    Cruz probably never had the right kind of personality to reach the White House in a televised age, anyway. That’s too bad. He’s a brilliant fellow who would make a fine president, but his trouble has little to do with Cancun. (Remember how close Cruz came to losing reëlection to a gay leprechaun in 2018. In Texas.)

    Anyway, maybe it’s time for the right to relax a bit regarding optics. The right is so tightly wound on optics, the left can spring the right any time it likes.

    By the way, @nebulafox, for what it’s worth, I’ve been following your posts more and more closely. Your posts tend to tie everything off so neatly that I usually can’t think of a reply; but there’s lots of good content there. The quality keeps rising.

    • Agree: Talha, iffen, Yahya K.
    • Replies: @anon
  52. Talha says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    For the white American Gentile to abandon the concept of race now that the concept has been weaponized against him would be an act of unilateral disarmament.

    I would certainly agree here; as long as others insist on race, race, race – they cannot expect whites to not reciprocate.

    As early as 1790, U.S. federal statues explicitly mentioned “white persons.”

    200+ years is the blink of an eye in terms of human history.

    Gibbons seems to be using “race” in a way different than what many people who use “race” now would. Moors a race? Like “race” race? I don’t think so?

    Not surprising though; I mean, he did call Africa a peninsula.

    In view of such examples, one is reluctant to credit the suggestion that race were a novel concept. It does not in fact seem to be.

    See above about the preciseness of the term. This is an interesting discussion about the the “Negro” in Islamic and Arab historical terms by a man who literally wrote a book on the subject:

    The full lecture is below the more tag and starts at 8:30.

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @dfordoom
  53. Talha says:
    @nebulafox

    abdication of any responsibility or noblesse oblige

    O ho – I disagree, sir! Vehemently, in fact! Did you or did you not see The Orange One personally hand tossing paper towels into a crowd of Puerto Ricans when they were in dire need of help:

    But that’s just not good enough for folks like you, is it?!

    Peace.

  54. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Talha

    Gibbons seems to be using “race” in a way different than what many people who use “race” now would.

    Up until the mid-20th century the word race was commonly used, especially by English writers, in the sense of a cultural, ethnic or national group. They would talk about the English race or the Anglo-Saxon race. Englishmen like Kipling thought of the Germans as an inferior race. Churchill thought there was such a thing as an Anglo-American race, which explains why Churchill did so much harm.

    The use of the term race to describe groups of people differentiated by skin colour is a peculiar modern American usage.

    • Replies: @iffen
  55. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    which explains why Churchill did so much harm.

    Would that include holding the Empire together until the Allies could get going?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Yahya K.
  56. @Not Only Wrathful

    would you prefer a random white boy over your own mixed race son?

    Genetically, you are going to be more closely related to a random white boy of your own nationality than your own mixed-race child.  So yes.

    • Replies: @Not Only Wrathful
  57. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    which explains why Churchill did so much harm.

    Would that include holding the Empire together until the Allies could get going?

    It would definitely include making the loss of the entire Empire inevitable. And it would include transforming a Great Power into a grovelling US puppet state. It would also include encouraging the Cold War. And giving Australians and Canadians reasons to despise the British and enter the US political orbit (with catastrophic results for Australia).

    Not to mention war crimes such as Dresden.

    Churchill was right about Hitler, I’ll concede that. As for his conduct of the war, the list of his strategic triumphs is impressive. There was Norway (yes I know he wasn’t prime minister at the time but as First Lord of the Admiralty he played the key role in this disaster. There was Crete, and the campaign in Greece. There was Singapore. There was Dieppe. The invasion of Italy was another Churchillian blunder.

    He turned political treachery into a fine art.

    If someone wants to topple statues of Winston Churchill I’ll happily lend them a hand.

    Chamberlain deserves more admiration than Churchill. Let’s not forget that it was Neville Chamberlain who stood up to Hitler in September 1939.

    Americans love Churchill because he consistently grovelled to them.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    , @iffen
  58. @El Dato

    If you can pull a fat percentage of domestic energy use directly from the sun – why not? It’s called “de-centralization”. I want it.

    There are a number of problems with this, including conceptual errors.

    The first is cost-shifting.  Whether you use “net metering” on an individual basis, or RECs (renewable energy certificates) on a commercial basis, the costs of the grid are shifted from “renewable” generators to everyone else.  The cost of new transmission lines for far-flung wind farms are not charged to the wind farms, they’re rolled into service fees.  Ditto the cost of RECs that utilities are required to puchase to meet “renewable portfolio standards”.  Net metering shifts the cost of maintaining the grid to other customers.  And all “renewables” shift the burden of reliability onto other generators, without paying them for it.

    The second is, your “decentralized” system is just as centralized as before, because you have to keep the existing generators to operate when the “renewables” aren’t producing.  They still have to be maintained but they sell less power, so you either have to give them “capacity payments” (which are going up, as Meredith Angwin shows in “Shorting the Grid”), pay them more per kWh, or both.

    If you think you can decentralize yourself, look at your electric bill and calculate how much in the way of e.g. batteries you’d need to ride out a week-long deficit of juice.  (That can be a week of dark and calm, a month of an average 25% deficit, or anything in between.)  A GC-2 battery holds a bit over 1.2 kWh and costs about $100 minus the core charge.  Now figure that those batteries will have to be replaced every few years if you cycle them regularly.  It adds up fast.

    NOW think how much you’d have to spend if you switch your furnace to a heat pump, your car to an EV, electric dryer and oven, etc.

    • Agree: dfordoom
  59. @nebulafox

    I don’t know much about geothermal energy: I’m sure it has problems that I’m unfamiliar with, and I would happy to be instructed on that by any commentator who knows better, but it doesn’t seem to be as tied into local weather conditions as solar or wind is.

    It depletes rapidly and there are severe geographic constraints.  I understand that the plant at The Geysers in Commiefornia has lost half its capacity since new because the heat is being sucked out of the ground.  You can’t really use it where you don’t have a natural “hot spot”, either.  Very little of the USA has favorable conditions for geothermal, and the total feasible capacity is well under 10% of current US generation.

    seems wise to just have as many sources as possible, so that if something goes haywire on one, you don’t get hurt too bad.

    You can go overboard on this.  All those sources require construction (meaning investment, meaning interest to be paid) and maintenance.  From a reliability standpoint, there is NO use to building inherently unreliable sources like wind and PV.

    Know what would have made a tremendous positive difference in Texas?  Cogenerating gas furnaces.

    That all being said, anybody who whines about the environment while being staunchly anti-nuclear power is either too stupid/too ideological to be worth wasting your time on

    Truer words.

  60. @dfordoom

    Chamberlain deserves more admiration than Churchill. Let’s not forget that it was Neville Chamberlain who stood up to Hitler in September 1939.

    Since I am even less British than you are, my opinion is of little account. However, it seems to me that you are right that Chamberlain was the better man. Not the greater man, for Churchill’s greatness can hardly be denied, but Churchill’s was the greatness of Vesuvius.

    Pity poor Pompeii.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  61. @Not Only Wrathful

    What I implied by that is that having mixed-race children is genetic suicide, and it’s not something I’m ever going to do.

    • Agree: Gordo
  62. The most curious thing about power generation is how so many persons who are not engineers and know nothing about power generation feel compelled to express strong opinions about power generation.

    If one does not know how to analyze stability via a transfer function using a Laplace transform and can calculate nothing involving fluid flow, heat transfer, entropy, magnetic flux, or a moment of inertia, then (unless maybe one has worked seven years or longer as a tradesman in power generation), one lacks the basis for a sensible opinion.

    That’s okay. Light switches are for everybody. Power generation is not.

    I’m against the cult of expertise, but engineering has been a modest and fairly responsible steward of the public trust. If one wants to form a sensible opinion regarding whether nuclear is a good idea, I suggest that one consult a mechanical engineer.

    If one will not ask a mechanical engineer and, worse, if one besets the bewildered engineer with diversicrats, then one should expect more disasters like the one in Texas.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Mr. Rational
    , @A123
  63. @Mr. Rational

    What is “genetic suicide”?

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  64. anon[359] • Disclaimer says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    The most curious thing about power generation is how so many persons who are not engineers and know nothing about power generation feel compelled to express strong opinions about power generation.

    And distribution, which is not even the same. But in the Current Year we are all instant experts Because We Say So, in imitation of our oracular figures in video.

    If one does not know how to analyze stability via a transfer function using a Laplace transform and can calculate nothing involving fluid flow, heat transfer, entropy, magnetic flux, or a moment of inertia, then (unless maybe one has worked seven years or longer as a tradesman in power generation), one lacks the basis for a sensible opinion.

    Simpler than that is just explaining via Ohm’s Law why this power along the road line carries 4,000 volts while that power line over the hill carries 15,000 volts…even though the house wiring is at 120 VAC. That’s electrician level, but ask anyone who has obsessed over CNN for the last fortnight those questions…nah.

    Actual power engineers I have known were either BS or MS degreed. Much of the work is rather ordinary. The mundane job of deciding how many more vacation cottages in that valley can be tied onto the existing electrical co-op network before some transformer upgrades must happen upstream isn’t ever going to be a Netflix series, but it gets done. Because light switches are for everyone, just as you said.

    More exciting things such as the job of “palming” a cross country intertie are not trivial, but also rarely make news.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  65. @V. K. Ovelund

    If one wants to form a sensible opinion regarding whether nuclear is a good idea, I suggest that one consult a mechanical engineer.

    Consult someone who works a technical (especially engineering or operator) position at a commercial nuclear plant.  The fear is born of ignorance; the more you know about nuclear energy, the more you like it.

  66. A123 says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Relying on experts has its own risks.

    Look at Climate Crisis mythology. Manipulating the pool of experts is a technique to control people.

    — Research grants were awarded to conformists who produced papers supporting the desired outcome.
    — Scientists who refused to conform were effectively driven out via the Publish or Perish research institution mindset.

    As a result the experts are turning out incorrect information.

    Remember, Dr. Fauci is an expert.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  67. @Not Only Wrathful

    What is “genetic suicide”?

    Watching all the adaptations your ancestors developed (often by their ill-adapted offspring dying before reproducing) be swamped by genes which have never been under the same selection pressures and likely won’t help your offspring fit in any environment or society, anywhere.

    Remember the fate of the mullatos in Haiti.

    • Replies: @Not Only Wrathful
  68. @Mr. Rational

    Your reply doesn’t seem to follow.

    Yes, it is easy to argue that it is a mistake to burden your offspring with genetically-derived illnesses and sub-optimisations, but that is a sword which cuts both ways.

    And while I’ll entertain that such sub-optimisations can correlate with race, just as height can, if you pick the tallest person in the room purely by considering their ethnicity, you’ll only be right a bit more often than if you were to pick at random, and you’ll certainly be more wrong than someone who picks on actual height – or, if you can’t see that, someone who picks on ability to reach things from the higher shelves.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  69. Yahya K. says:
    @iffen

    Would that include holding the Empire together until the Allies could get going?

    No. It includes his utterly callous indifference towards the suffering of his Empire’s subjects.

    We can quibble all we want about the details and causes of the Bengal famine. But at the end of the day, the British were ruling India on their own volition. They were responsible for the safety and well-being of their subjects. The bucks stops with them. And no more person is responsible than the arch-imperialist himself, who diverted the food supply from India to Europe, and who when informed of the dire situation in India responded with a glib “why hasn’t Gandhi died yet”.

  70. @A123

    Relying on experts has its own risks.

    Remember, Dr. Fauci is an expert.

    I have no opinion regarding Dr. Fauci specifically, but completely agree with you on experts.

    However, a layman is unlikely to understand power generation any more than he understands coronary surgery. Why, the U.S. Internal Revenue Code is easier. If a layman disagrees with me on this point, that’s great: I’ll back him; but if he subsequently cannot form any clear idea of, say, a magnetic flux, then we’ve got a problem.

    That is, we’ve got a problem if an antifragile supply of electricity is what we want.

    The way the once-honorable word science has been converted into a know-nothing, partisan curse word is disgraceful. It’s all: red team, yay! Blue team, boo! Or vice versa, more likely.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  71. songbird says:
    @Yahya K.

    IMO, that Churchill caused the Bengal Famine is essentially a nationalist fable invented so that it could be told to Indian school children to try to unite them, despite their enormous diversity.

    who diverted the food supply from India to Europe

    Absurdist claim. It is logistically difficult to ship food from India to Europe, as well as unnecessary. Much easier to ship it from Canada or America. Indian partisans are better off claiming that it was caused by food being diverted to the local theater of war, which is probably also untrue.

    In the postwar years, India was the target of decades of food aid from Europeans, and even advanced scientific research about increasing agricultural yields that was freely shared.

    To me, it seems Indians want to try to justify their sense of grievance against Europeans, with this idea that Europeans starved Indians (Churchill is just a figurehead for their sense of grievance) which is really weird considering that, when you consider historical estimates of India’s population, Europeans might be responsible for as much as 97% of Indians living today. And the minimum is clearly greater than 90%.

    The Chinese had multiple famines but no scapegoats.

    • Agree: Not Only Wrathful
    • Replies: @Talha
  72. Talha says:
    @songbird

    India was the target of decades of food aid from Europeans… sense of grievance against Europeans

    Why would you bring in all of Europe into the conversation when the charge is clearly leveled at the leadership of the British Empire at the time? What does, say, what Sweden did to help or harm India have to do with it?

    Churchill is just a figurehead for their sense of grievance

    I would say bringing in Europeans as a whole is an attempt at evading British culpability to the charges.

    Let’s stick to the facts of the matter that are germane to the discussion.

    I’m interested in it being fleshed out (not interested in shouts for reparations or apologies); do you have references sympathetic to your views specifically about British policy under Churchill at the time from reliable sources?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @songbird
    , @iffen
  73. dfordoom says: • Website
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Since I am even less British than you are, my opinion is of little account. However, it seems to me that you are right that Chamberlain was the better man. Not the greater man, for Churchill’s greatness can hardly be denied, but Churchill’s was the greatness of Vesuvius.

    Pity poor Pompeii.

    That sums it up pretty well.

  74. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Mr. Rational

    What I implied by that is that having mixed-race children is genetic suicide,

    That’s true.

    I like the fact that there is so much diversity to humanity. I like living in a world in which there are lots of different ethnicities and cultures. Inter-marriage between these different groups will eventually destroy that diversity.

    Of course you could also argue that having mixed-ethnicity children is genetic suicide. If Italians have children with Swedes or Poles have children with Scots that’s also committing genetic suicide. It is contributing to the destruction of genetic diversity and it is contributing to the destruction of cultural diversity. Eventually Italians and Swedes and Poles and Scots will cease to exist. You just end up with an undifferentiated sludge of generic Europeans.

    That’s why Americans, Australians and Canadians have no genuine sense of identity and they try to construct artificial identities for themselves. Artificial identities based on absurdities like their sexual habits or ridiculous mythical genders.

    As an Australia I’m very conscious of the essential unreality of the Australian identity. Australians have no cultural identity at all.

    If you’re an Italian (or an Italian-American) you should find a nice Italian girl to marry. If you don’t then you’re committing an act of both genetic and cultural destruction.

  75. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Yahya K.

    It includes his utterly callous indifference towards the suffering of his Empire’s subjects.

    I agree. But Churchill’s callous indifference towards the suffering of his Empire’s subjects is hardly surprising since his attitude towards the suffering of his own people was also callous indifference.

    Churchill was a nasty piece of work.

  76. anon[309] • Disclaimer says:
    @Yahya K.

    And no more person is responsible than the arch-imperialist himself, who diverted the food supply from India to Europe,

    What does this even mean in the context of 1943?
    Please expand on “diverted the food supply from India to Europe”, if you wish to do so.

  77. songbird says:
    @Talha

    Why would you bring in all of Europe into the conversation when the charge is clearly leveled at the leadership of the British Empire at the time?

    When you say “British Empire” even if you don’t specifically mean it, it is tantamount to saying pre-Windrush Britain.

    [MORE]
    I.e. white Britain, which can be expanded to mean all whites in colonial empires or obviously all whites. I don’t believe it is possible for an Indian to assert this narrative in the West, without it being implicitly anti-white, whether or not the speaker intends it to be. It simply is, in effective terms, given what’s happening today, and it, in that context, in the context of invasion, it strikes me as stunningly obnoxious.

    I wouldn’t presume to tell my reluctant and unasked host that his ancestors killed my ancestors. Even though my family is bigger than his, and even though his house is full of uninvited and frankly obnoxious guests and mine is completely empty of them. Especially, if he had fed me often before.

    Victimhood is status in the West now, and victimhood isn’t free, it comes at someone else’s expense. Just like you cannot eat a free meal in the home of your host.

    For all I know, the Bengal narrative was designed for domestic use (social glue), and escaped. It seems plausible as Jews have a victimhood narrative that unites them across some ethnic boundaries. I’ve heard this from an Indian I respect – that it was put in schoolbooks to serve as a nationalist curriculum.

    The nuts and bolts of the theory seems to involve malice. In a place like ww2-era India – monsoon weather – dense population – poor infrastructure – tropical heat and damp. Famine is basically normal – i.e. it would happen so often, every few decades.

    Personally, I don’t take – or socially approve of – the malice view even of the Potato Famine in Ireland, though I think the response would have been different (out of political necessity) if it had taken place in Britain, so I hope you can understand why I find it jarring. My view of the Bengal famine is that it was a natural famine and the response would have been different without the war – but one can’t really put that at the feet of whites. (again, not that you mean to)

    Personal excuses, but I’m kind of squinty-eyed right now, and so not interested in doing a deep dive, but I believe Mr. Karlin has touched on the subject. And, anyway, I think you can appreciate that my ire comes from what I see as a lack of tact or what I view as a social transgression. Not that I care what people say in India – unless it is being exported to the West, in some case, such as an Indian using the internet to post on a Western site.

    • Replies: @Talha
  78. @Not Only Wrathful

    Your reply doesn’t seem to follow.

    Only because you can’t follow it.  That’s your problem.

    Yes, it is easy to argue that it is a mistake to burden your offspring with genetically-derived illnesses and sub-optimisations

    No, it’s not illnesses.  It’s mostly intelligence deficiencies and personality incompatibilities.  Evolution FITS people to where and what they are; “diversity” MISfits them.

    • Replies: @Not Only Wrathful
  79. @Mr. Rational

    You’re either too dim to understand my point, too dishonest or too emotionally invested in your own.

    I’ll wager the last.

    Unsurprisingly, “Mr Rational” is entirely possessed by his emotions and has no idea.

  80. – To the bad faith assumption that white gentiles who accept the idea of human biodiversity necessarily believe there is a genetic hierarchy with blacks at the bottom, is it also assumed these people view Asians and Jews as superior to themselves? The thinking is really lazy. That’s what makes it bad faith, I guess. Within the broader category of “HBD realists” there are a subset who believe in racial hierarchies, but do most? Do many? And among those who do, are fertility and survivability the metrics for assessing positions on that hierarchy? These are mostly rhetorical questions, I think.

    The original ‘HBD realists’ were anti-racialists. The scientist Jonathan Marks who first coined and popularised the term ‘human-biodiversity’ shows why human races don’t exist in his 1995 book Human Biodiversity: Genes, Race, and History. This is why it’s amusing I’ve been called anti-HBD when my views are in line with the guy who came up with the term.

  81. iffen says:
    @Yahya K.

    I acknowledge the historical existence of imperialism and its manifold effects.

    At the end of the day I’m partisan, and I think that Churchill was “good” for America.

    By the way, India has been in charge of India for almost 75 years now and nary a peon can be found. And they’ve done away with religious riots, and eliminated the caste system that the British invented and imposed, and they’ve …

    I just don’t like the way that they treat the hundreds of thousands of Americans that have emigrated there.

    • LOL: Gordo
    • Replies: @Yahya K.
    , @dfordoom
  82. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    Doom, I’m enjoying my schadenfreude at your expense now because I will be endlessly searching for Paradise by the time your grandchildren say to you, “Grandpa, tell us about the good old days when America was the hegemon instead of China.”

  83. iffen says:
    @Talha

    Those nasty British imperialists tried to do away with suttee. Thank goodness some of the faithful revived the practice after the cultural imperialists were evicted.

    • Replies: @Talha
  84. Talha says:
    @iffen

    Their religion, their prerogative. If the only thing preventing them from continuing widow burning was the presence of the British imposing it upon them, that was eventually going to end.

    The Mughals had already prohibited it unless the widow wanted to voluntarily burn herself, so the British stopped voluntary self-immolation in that region of India. I’m honestly not sure what the rule was where the Marathas or other Hindu rulers held power.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Not Only Wrathful
    , @iffen
  85. @Yahya K.

    No, the Bengal Famine of 1943 had nothing to do with food stocks being diverted. They weren’t. It was more that Bengal was no longer being subsidized by the teetering British Empire.

    The short-term reason was that there was a poor harvest which, combined with imports from Burma being shut off by the Japanese invasion and laws in place to protect other Indian states’ food supplies, led to extreme shortages.

    The long-term reason was the tremendous growth in the Indian population under British rule. This was because such rule provided enough peace and prosperity for the subcontinent to become one of the most densely populated parts of the world.

    Perhaps Britain could have done more, but considering that the normal way they would have, by subsidising India from Burma, was cut off by WW2, one could not really expect much more. Or they could have done what the Mughals did for population control and been absolute savages and murdered millions of people for no reason…(I am being facetious)

    After WW2, Britain and the rest of the West spent huge sums and a lot of technology to make sure India would be able to support its far larger population.

    Churchill also privately said some cruel off-hand remarks. Considering that he was fighting WW2 at the time, I feel that such venting should be easily understood.

  86. @Talha

    The Mughals had already prohibited it unless the widow wanted to voluntarily burn herself, so the British stopped voluntary self-immolation in that region of India.

    Lol. Why do so many Muslims justify horrific cruelty to women this way? Do you guys really think it is convincing? “She chose it!” Yes, I am sure she chose to burn herself to death and she wasn’t terrified of being beaten, raped and murdered by her dead husband’s brother if she didn’t…

    • Agree: A123
  87. @Not Only Wrathful

    … beaten, raped and murdered by her dead husband’s brother …

    I’d more likely believe it had you written, “beaten, filmed and slandered by her dead husband’s reporter.

    [MORE]

    Lol. Why do so many Muslims justify horrific cruelty to women this way? Do you guys really think it is convincing? “She chose it!” Yes, I am sure she chose to burn herself to death and she wasn’t terrified of being beaten, raped and murdered by her dead husband’s brother if she didn’t…

    I used to believe anti-Muslim suggestions like this. Then, I noticed that the persons from whom the suggestions had come were the same persons that had suggested that I were a privileged oppressor and that Donald Trump were a Russian agent.

    I haven’t become pro-Muslim, but the fact remains that my own experiences with Muslims have been pretty positive. I am not sure what else I should go by.

    But 9/11, right? Well, maybe. This is The Unz Review, after all. We have theories about that.

    And the Ft. Hood attack? Well, admittedly, that was disturbing. But I am telling you that I distrust the media to render a proportionate picture. Consider the ludicrous disproportion with which black victims and black perps are portrayed.

    If you’ve spent any time in Dearborn, Michigan, you know that it’s not the neat, orderly, white working-class suburb it used to be, but it’s a veritable paradise next to neighboring Detroit.

    Again, am not pro-Muslim, but when it comes to anti-Muslim propaganda, I consider the source.

    • Replies: @Not Only Wrathful
  88. Talha says:
    @Not Only Wrathful

    Since when did I justify the practice? The Mughals were quite horrified at widow burning but it falls under the rights of religious practice and there is no provision in Islam to prohibit other people from practicing parts of their religion that has nothing to do with you just because you don’t agree with it.

    The Mughals set up a system where the widow had to present herself to the sultan or one of his representatives and testify that she was going to do this of her own free will and not being coerced.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Not Only Wrathful
  89. @Not Only Wrathful

    Pardon, my last comment is apt to misinterpretation. I did not mean to suggest that you were the source of the disinformation, but only that others may have equally disinformed the both of us.

    • Thanks: Not Only Wrathful
  90. @V. K. Ovelund

    Nothing against Muslims, but many really do have a barely suppressed hatred of women. I’ve been to plenty of Muslim countries and known my fair few Muslim women who told me about their lives to have learned that from my own experience.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  91. A123 says:
    @Not Only Wrathful

    Why do so many Muslims justify horrific cruelty to women this way?

    Woman and children… I placed Talha the Violent on my blocked commenters list some time ago when he defended Ahlam Al-Tamimi’s murder of 7 children in the Sbarro bombing.

    Perhaps Islam can be reformed. Until that happens, the only way for Infidels to be safe is keeping them out. Muslims cannot be successfully assimilated into Christian nations like the U.S. Look at the Boston Marathon Bombing and the Pulse Night Club Attack.

    PEACE 😇

     

  92. @Talha

    No, they didn’t. Occasionally an Emperor would show some compassion and make a half-hearted effort to reduce it, but ultimately they didn’t care enough about women to fulfill their duty as Head of State and make a consistent and coherent effort to stop young widows from being burned alive in front of gawping crowds.

    That doesn’t make them awful people. The past is complicated, but why do you choose to misrepresent it?

    Perhaps in five hundred years, your descendent by disposition will be trying to persuade mine that current US authorities banned transgender chemical castration and genital mutilation.

    After all, those things are more voluntary than suttee was, and they are strictly regulated and made much harder than they would be otherwise.

    Then some other person will be saying that we need to cancel Tom Wolfe for having lived in such an age and my descendant will be forced to walk between yours and him, by both not judging the past and by not lying about it defensively.

    • Replies: @Talha
  93. iffen says:
    @Talha

    Their religion, their prerogative.

    Damn self-righteous Conquistadors, interfering with the free exercise of religion. In the Americas of all places!

    • Replies: @Talha
  94. @V. K. Ovelund

    Sorry I missed this!

    Come, what do you think

    I’ll have children with someone who doesn’t simply project onto me and therefore cares for me.

    Ideally, she’ll also be thin, pretty, highly intelligent and financially secure. Not necessarily in that order.

    I don’t much care for all of the other possible considerations. If it correlates with race, then so be it. If it doesn’t, that’s ok too.

    No, I don’t believe that this type of question does need to be answered. It has already been answered by whites, year after year, decade after decade, ad nauseam. It has ceased to be a real question a long time ago.

    Surely the answer by white people is that they don’t care very much about the label “white”? They care a bit on average and each person seems to balance off that care against their other cares differently.

    When do nonwhites get asked such questions?

    Doesn’t life ask everyone such questions?

    I recognise that the culture is intensely hostile to “whiteness”, which means it ks hostile to white people identifying as white people, but that is another issue.

    It is certainly an important one and the bullying which it currently creates is ugly and poisonous. It may also lead to very serious oppressions, but one reason I find it particularly bizarre is that “whiteness” has very rarely been a crucial part of anyone’s identity.

    The anti-whiteness movement is a tragic form of collective hysteria and psychodrama. People who react too strongly against it may also get lost in such an illusion.

    Your great-grandfather would hardly have been conflicted about which outside stocks were more assimilable and which, less; but European man can, and has, and will, absorb a limited genetic admixture from outside and remain European. In the aggregate, though, the less admixture, the better, for a program of ever-increasing admixture can end only one way: in the end of European man.

    Yes, European man as you define it, but why choose to reify that above all other identities? Protecting it means restricting the choices of real Europeans and therefore sacrificing their actual wills to preserve what is ultimately an artificial persona.

    Yes, it has a basis in biology and yes identities can be crucial to society and most individual’s psychological formulation, but such personas are there to serve people.

    People are not there to serve personas.

    The latter is the essence of tragedy.

    Somewhat akin to American citizens sacrificing themselves and their general citizenry to make America the concept great.

    So while humans seem to need these personas (defensivenesses), that of “European man” isn’t even close to the most important identity component to most who fit within it; therefore you’re asking a lot of defensiveness from people for what you think is important for them. Of course, it is your right to ask, but don’t be surprised when they say no.

    A meta-observation, not especially directed at you: it is plain that more than a few readers here are puzzled that someone who appears to be as moderate as I do could hold views that lie so far outside the mainstream. Does that indict me, or does it indict the mainstream

    The mainstream is becoming extreme in its anti-whiteness. Your efforts to provide balance therefore are necessarily equally and oppositely extreme.

    But it is easy to forget where the fulcrum of the balance actually lies when you’re constantly trying to defend yourself!

    I don’t blame you, and I very easily empathise with you, but such a situation can be its own trap.

    Distorting oneself to provide balance to such a gigantic distortion is exhausting and self-alienating. I admire it, but I also feel you should be aware of what you are doing.

    Knowing yourself and knowing the universe is a beautiful thing. It is to be the tip of the spear of cosmological destiny; but it requires not getting lost through provocation along the way.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  95. Talha says:
    @Not Only Wrathful

    why do you choose to misrepresent it?

    Since when?

    “A Hindu Princess Committing Sati against the Wishes of Emperor Akbar”

    https://worldhistorycommons.org/hindu-princess-committing-sati-against-wishes-emperor-akbar

    And since this is quite off-topic, see below the more tag. Though it must be noted that; this one-size-fits-all approach to legal theory is one of the reasons behind the zero-sum-game culture wars in parts of the West.

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    “SOME LESSER-KNOWN FACTS ON THE SATI PRACTICE:
    Sati was regarded as a barbaric practice by the Islamic rulers of the Mughal period
    In the 16th century, Humayun was the first to try a royal agreement against the practice. Akbar was next to issue official orders prohibiting Sati and since then it was done voluntarily by women. He also issued orders that no woman could commit Sati without a specific permission from his chief police officers
    Akbar had also instructed the officers to delay the woman’s decision for as long as possible”
    https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/gk-current-affairs/story/sati-pratha-facts-275586-2015-12-04

    those things are more voluntary than suttee was, and they are strictly regulated and made much harder than they would be otherwise.

    This is not analogous because; 1) this is not a religious rite (and if it was, should be treated differently) and 2) your argument only makes the case that sati should have been even better regulated and not banned outright.

    fulfill their duty as Head of State

    You think this is a slam dunk and it is not. The head of state has multiple duties; one of which is to balance the rights of an individual from a completely different religion which includes allowing them the right to carry it out a ritual of self harm of they feel it is a religious function even if it disturbs you. It should be noted that the British initially tried to accommodate voluntary sati as well before banning it outright.

    It can certainly be argued that the Mughals should have been better at applying their policy and not letting any cases of forced sati from slipping through, but that again only confirms that their policy should have been applied better.

    What right did the British have to come into a foreign land and deny a widow a religious right if she had full conviction in it being an act of worship that she wanted to perform fully voluntarily?

  96. Talha says:
    @iffen

    LOL! Well certainly I would agree with your sentiments if random guys were voluntarily climbing the pyramids to have their hearts cut out and heads tossed down the steps for a better harvest and weather patterns…but I’m not sure if that was a voluntary process.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @iffen
  97. Talha says:
    @songbird

    white Britain, which can be expanded to mean all whites in colonial empires or obviously all whites.

    Nope. When you say British Empire, you do not automatically mean the Spanish or Portuguese or French anymore than when someone says “the Wahhabis Sis so and so” they mean to loop in all Muslims – it simply does not follow.

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    I wouldn’t presume to tell my reluctant and unasked host that his ancestors killed my ancestors.

    From what I know, Yahya is not from India and plans to go back to Egypt after his studies in the US so; 1) he was let in for an education (so he certainly asked and has the forms to prove it – maybe he didn’t ask you personally, but no government functions that way) and 2) he is planning to go back.

    None of what you wrote applies.

    The nuts and bolts of the theory seems to involve malice.

    Or callous indifference or different priorities during war like wanting to defeat Axis powers on multiple fronts being more important than providing necessary relief in one pocket of the empire. OK, but you can’t expect people in that pocket who watched their kids starve not to have a residual resentment towards you because “we had to defeat Nazis” which was not a fight they signed up for or had anything to do with.

    I think you can appreciate that my ire comes from what I see as a lack of tact or what I view as a social transgression.

    Well, I was hoping for a more academic discussion but OK.

    an Indian using the internet to post on a Western site.

    OK, but he is Saudi-Egyptian.

    • Replies: @RSDB
    , @Yahya K.
    , @songbird
  98. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    I think “unasked host” was probably supposed to be either AE or Ron Unz.

    Both of these are, to the best of my knowledge, American, though, so I’m not sure how they would be affected by slurs on Churchill, unless by the fact that he was also part American by descent.

    • Replies: @Talha
  99. Talha says:
    @RSDB

    I think “unasked host” was probably supposed to be either AE or Ron Unz.

    🤔 – I’m not sure either of them care much about Churchill, though I could very well be wrong.

    Anyway, I personally didn’t see an attack on Churchill’s war time policies to be an attack on all Europeans any more than a criticism of Franco’s policies applies to what DeGualle did.

    And Yahya didn’t introduce the topic of Churchill either. Dfordoom is an Aussie and he was talking about the harms Churchill’s policies brought about.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
  100. anon[419] • Disclaimer says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    It seems that plenty of persons in this thread think that Sen. Cruz has offended someone else. On the other hand, I see not one soul here whom Cruz has actually offended.

    Suggest you read “The Prince” by Nick Machiavelli. Appearances do matter[1]. What Senator Cubo-Canadian Cruz did was worse than a mistake or offense, it was a blunder. All politicians lie, but a clever politician doesn’t lie so obviously or clumsily; “Escorting my children to Cancun”, lol. Unlike Clinton, Obama, or Biden Cruz cannot count on a sycophantic press to cover for him, he has to be better than them in order to avoid such blunders.

    Here’s an epic troll: someone hired a mariachi to go play outside of his house. Because lolz.

    https://nypost.com/2021/02/22/mariachi-band-plays-at-ted-cruzs-home-amid-mexico-backlash/

    [1] It is worth noting that the kingdom of Jordan has survived intact longer than most other governments in the middle east. The Hashemites have so far played their position with care, and have produced two competent kings in a row. Part of their success has featured maintaining the image of calm competence; this is easier for a competent man, obviously.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  101. Yahya K. says:
    @Talha

    When you say British Empire, you do not automatically mean the Spanish or Portuguese or French anymore than when someone says “the Wahhabis Sis so and so” they mean to loop in all Muslims – it simply does not follow.

    LOL. Exactly. It’s funny to watch the sort of mental gymnastics one has to perform to reach the conclusion that a criticism of Churchill and the British Empire is a blanket attack on all whites – but hey, you learn new things everyday. But I think I already know why he does it.

    It is quite clear that ‘songbird’ is an obsessive racist – and I use the term not in the usual derogatory manner, but in the literal sense – who carries his race on his sleeve. That’s why he gets triggered everytime an ostensibly ‘white’ person or entity (like Churchill or Hitler) is criticized, even though the comment is not directed towards him – he sees it as an attack on himself. Of course there is the caveat that he doesn’t mind it when other white people criticize Churchill or the British Empire, like dfordoom for instance. It’s only when an inferior darkie does it is when he starts really winding up.

    He also has a rather perverse urge to dump on black people whenever he gets the chance. Just a few days ago we were conversing on a thread, and it became clear to me that he held a massive chip on his shoulder towards blacks. Even the mildest positive remark towards blacks triggers songbirds urge to put them down and demean them back to their place. And of course, if you take a quick look through his archive, you’ll easily find the sort of derogatory remarks he directs at other races.

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/open-thread-74/#comment-3178985

    songbird says:
    @German_reader
    Let’s suppose, you merely took Europeans and set them down in America. Would they not say they loved diversity, once some nigger accosted them in the airport with the question?

    Once, I was accosted with some formulation like “Sir, you don’t look racist, can I interview you as part of my college project about diversity?” Did I tell him that he was ape accosting me mere feet from where one of my ancestors died building the city that gorillas like him had invaded and defiled. That only 10% of blacks should be educated past the 6th grade? That they should all be sent back to Africa? No, I politely told him that I did not have the time, which was true enough, though I would I have told him that even if I were an old pensioner.

    He has no problem disparaging my kind as “sand n*ggers”:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/guardian-publishes-neoliberalism-txt-manifesto/#comment-2793585

    songbird says:
    @AaronB
    Give me the same strife, ethnic ferment, and decivilization as Japan – that is all I ask.

    I want to look into a sea of white, English faces, and be disquieted by a Welsh phenotype. I want women to be able to leave their purses and babies unattended. I want a whole brigade of police, having nothing else to do, to be assigned to solving the most trivial crimes, like gum wrappers blown out of one’s hand by the wind.

    And when they catch the perps, I want them to learn to use the exact same adjectives that constables in 1850s Ireland wrote to distinguish the darker gradations in complexion of the milky-white slags who stole bags from the turnip huts of my heroic ancestors – women who if they were forced to misceginate with Nilotics, would spawn what sand niggers like Taleb would call “white babies.”

    All this to say, that he thinks it’s a “social transgression” and a “lack of tact” for an Indian to criticize Churchill or the British Empire, buts its perfectly OK to go around calling black people “gorillas” who ought “to be sent back to Africa”, or a Middle Easterner a “sand n*gger”. And of course he has no trouble coming up with criticism of rulers outside his own region – like in this instance where he criticized the Saudi royal family (quite fairly I might add – but also hypocritically)

    So I’ve concluded that there is no use in talking to him anymore – he is a hopeless nutcase. I appreciate your defense Talha, but next time he’ll just be on my ignore list, so I won’t see his comments anymore.

    • Replies: @Talha
  102. Yahya K. says:
    @iffen

    I acknowledge the historical existence of imperialism and its manifold effects.

    Thanks for the measured reply.

    [MORE]

    At the end of the day I’m partisan, and I think that Churchill was “good” for America.

    Fair. My comment above may have come off as one-sided, but I actually like Churchill a bit. Mostly because I enjoy reading about interesting characters in history, and he’s certainly one of the more colorful ones. But also for nostalgic reasons. One of my favorite childhood teachers was an old English lady from Liverpool. I remember she was a hardcore WW2 buff and would decorate her classroom with WW2 memorabilia and play 1940s era songs like “Land Of Hope And Glory” and “White Cliffs Of Dover” over the speakers during breaktime. She also took us to visit the graves of commonwealth troops in El-Alamien, where allied forces won a key victory that was the beginning of the end of the Axis in North Africa. I don’t know if you’ve talked to Brits (especially the older ones) on a deep level, but you’ll find that they are very proud of their role in WW2 – far moreso than Americans. Its almost like a religion and Churchill is their god or something. At least that’s the impression I got from my teachers (though they were mostly old-fashioned folks from places like Yorkshire, Leads, Liverpool, Norwich, and Scotland. I’m not sure how the Londoners are).

    I’d be interested to know if you have any relatives who fought in WW2, or were involved in some way.

    By the way, India has been in charge of India for almost 75 years now and nary a peon can be found. And they’ve done away with religious riots, and eliminated the caste system that the British invented and imposed, and they’ve …

    Yeah I agree with the sentiment. They have no-one to blame but themselves at this point. Personally I think India went wrong by going for democracy soon after they gained independence. I think they put the cart before the horse. That is, they should have developed first then transitioned to democracy. It seems that autocracies and dictators – especially benevolent ones like Lee Kuan Yew, Park Chung-Hee, Chiang Kai-Shek, Tito, Ataturk – work better than democracies for newly independent states. People in post-colonial countries aren’t educated or civilized enough to make democracy work. So basically they get the worst aspects of democracy – the mob rule and the pandering – but without much of the corresponding benefits. Of course autocracies aren’t a sliver bullet either – they’ve been pretty lousy in the Arab world. But competent and well-intentioned autocrats can work wonders for a developing country in a way democracy simply cannot.

    So back to India. The one thing India has going for it over the long run is the sheer number of smart people they have at the top. People don’t realize yet the immensity of talent in India, because India is still malnourished and not up to full potential in IQ. But if you put the numbers onto a spreadsheet and calculate the z-scores and stuff, you’ll see what I mean. One problem presented is how to figure out what India’s genotypic IQ average is. The current tested results in India proper – around 80s – seems understated due to malnourishment and poor schooling. So I looked around for British-Indian numbers, since I figured they were the most reasonable approximation, and found the range to be 92-96. That seems round about right imo, though we can’t know for sure. Anyway, I plugged in the numbers:

    Average IQ = 94
    Standard Deviation = 15
    Population = 1.4 Billion

    And out comes 11,476,550 Indians with IQ130+. That’s more than the US (5,428,070), Russia (3,276,019) and Germany (1,820,011) combined. Even if you decrease the average IQ in India to 92, you still get 7,908,842 IQ130+ Indians.

    So yeah, India probably has enough smart people to hit near-first world levels of productivity, even if it has a lower average IQ than western nations, due to the smart fraction theory. But its also important not to put too much emphasis on IQ. There are other factors at play that are just as important. For example, a critical factor keeping India down is its defective political system, which we talked about above. They also have a culture where anyone who shouts and protests can stop a major project from going through. For example, just a few years ago a major Korean Steel company called POSCO tried to open up a $12 billion factory in Odisha, but couldn’t get the factory up and running because a bunch of environmental activists took to the street to protest. This sort of thing would have never happened in China.

    But it will be interesting to see how India develops throughout the 21st century. My prediction is that their GDP per capita will reach 50-60% of western levels near the end of the century – mostly due to western stagnation, but also because of India latent potential. Unless of course the politicians keep screaming at each other instead of fixing the system:

    • Replies: @anon
  103. Talha says:
    @Yahya K.

    It is quite clear that ‘songbird’ is an obsessive racist

    Ok, but there are plenty of those in these parts. I’ve generally had civil interactions (even if disagreeable) with him, from my memory.

    Wa salaam.

    [MORE]

    Even the mildest positive remark towards blacks triggers songbirds urge to put them down and demean them back to their place.

    This is also common place, but depends on where one is posting. You mentioned Mr. Karlin’s blog, which I used to comment on, but no longer have for a while now. Certain places attract certain persons and I don’t really post under certain authors like Karlin or Reed or Sailer and a few others because I didn’t find any personal benefit in it.

    I appreciate your defense Talha

    Well, I was hoping to get into a discussion about historical details about the matter because history of India is a point of personal interest.

    but next time he’ll just be on my ignore list, so I won’t see his comments anymore.

    This is a good policy to employ if you find no net benefit to your life in interacting with someone. As the Sufis remind, you have only a limited number of breaths in your life, make them count.

  104. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    I think one of dfordoom’s most strongly urged criticisms was that Churchill’s policies decreased the British sphere of influence, which puts the subsequent conversation in an interesting light.

    Anyway it is two different things to accuse Churchill and the British imperial system of causing famines in Bengal, and requires two different arguments, neither of which should offend Americans in any way; seeing as we live in a country one of whose foundational documents accuses the British crown of unleashing “merciless Indian [different Indian] savages” upon our nascent nation. I don’t really want to get involved in either of those discussions, but I would note that the most prolific actual Indian commenter here (“Malla”), who has no love for Churchill, argues very strongly against his responsibility for the famine, advancing ample support for his contentions.

    I’m not really in a position to judge here, but I would also like to note that history in general is less black-and-white than it appears at first glance, and ALL writing of history is biased in some way or another. This doesn’t prevent our having knowledge about the past; only we see it through a grimy windowpane, or “per speculum in aenigmate“.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @dfordoom
  105. Talha says:
    @RSDB

    Anyway it is two different things to accuse Churchill and the British imperial system of causing famines in Bengal, and requires two different arguments

    Agreed and I don’t think I would forward it was just one man’s responsibility. The empire was huge and there was a massive war going on.

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    neither of which should offend Americans in any way

    Agreed…unless you loop in all whites or something, which I think is not coherent. From an American (realpolitik) perspective, criticism of British policy is warranted as a justification for shouldering them out of top dog position as world hegemon.

    the most prolific actual Indian commenter here (“Malla”), who has no love for Churchill, argues very strongly against his responsibility for the famine, advancing ample support for his contentions.

    I’ve had some nice interesting conversations with Malla, so might bring this up with him. And again, as you mentioned, I wonder what his perspective is regarding British Empire responsibility versus just Churchill.

    ALL writing of history is biased in some way or another

    100%.

  106. songbird says:
    @Talha

    When you say British Empire, you do not automatically mean the Spanish or Portuguese

    Right, but I’m not woke. (not suggesting you are) But moral considerations need to include consequences, not just intent, and, obviously, it is fuel for the woke, to bring this up in the West.

    [MORE]
    Suppose they take Churchill’s statue down, are you seriously going to propose they will put another (non-woke) Englishman in his place?

    I’m fully aware of Yahya’s identity. My example of an Indian was meant to be open-ended and apply to numerous Indians that I’ve interacted with on this issue. I’m using “Indian” in the broad sense (someone with genes from that area.) And Yahya acknowledges he has some, and anyway he is a guest now, regardless of future plans.

    I’ve never ever heard anyone else promote this idea, just Indians. And Europeans went through much worse in WW2, including a famine caused by blockade after the fighting stopped, and many blame Churchill for that – I won’t go into the graphic images bombing cities – but some are them are very graphic. And we are still deeply, deeply effected by the war. Saying “Bengal Famine” in the West seems to be saying “Remember your most destructive war? The one that damaged your civilization the most? It is not about you – it is about us immigrants, as everything should be, and will be in the future.”

    we had to defeat Nazis

    Seems it would fall on Japan, if anyone. China got it harder, BTW. And Ireland’s pop is still smaller than before its famine. It practically killed the native language and culture – was the final nail in the coffin, as the poorest spoke it the most, and were the most likely to die or emigrate.

    But I won’t bore you by continuing. I think the main problem boils done to my civilization is under attack, and meanwhile India (India proper, but you can extrapolate to Pakistan) has less tourists than the small nation of Hungary – it is not in the maws of globalism. And many tourists are even afraid to visit there, let alone settle there.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @dfordoom
  107. iffen says:
    @Talha

    Interesting distinctions.

    • Replies: @Talha
  108. Talha says:
    @songbird

    Neither Yahya or I are woke either.

    Suppose they take Churchill’s statue down

    Please tell me you are not suggesting that there can be no legitimate and common sense medium ground between considering some past political leader above reproach/criticism and tearing down his statue. I mean criticism of a particular leader’s policy seems to be fair ground for discussion.

    I’ve never seen Yahya call for statues to be toppled.

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    anyway he is a guest now, regardless of future plans.

    In the UK? I thought he was in the US. I’m not understanding the coherency here; so if you take a vacation to Iran, you shouldn’t criticize the Ottoman Empire’s policies? Why?

    I’ve never ever heard anyone else promote this idea, just Indians.

    They have access to the most relevant data points and why would Brazilians be interested in researching the matter?

    Saying “Bengal Famine” in the West seems to be saying

    No, it seems to just be going over the historical details of a particular related event during WW2. I mean, this is a bit like saying you can’t bring up discussions about how many people actually died in the camps in Germany because you want to rub it in Jewish peoples’ faces. Some people want to research a historical event and set the record straight. If you want to counter their arguments, present your case in a debate about historical evidence.

    meanwhile India (India proper, but you can extrapolate to Pakistan) has less tourists than the small nation of Hungary

    OK, but I still don’t know what this has to do with the legitimacy of entertaining an academic discussion about the historic details of the Bengal Famine.

    • Agree: RSDB
    • Replies: @songbird
  109. Other than white European Gentiles, Muslims are the safest demographic casually to denigrate in the United States. Now, every demographic in the United States, except maybe the founding demographic, should have to put up with a moderate degree of casual denigration for their own good; but why are Muslims a particular target?

    I am suspicious.

    Sensational Muslim atrocities are periodically peddled to us by the very same media that cover up rampant negro crime. Meanwhile, nonblack Muslims one actually meets in the United States are seldom very scary. More importantly, Muslims are not insidious, ingratiating, contemptuous and manipulative like a certain other demographic I could name.

    I feel that I am being baited. Someone wants me to dislike Muslims. That same someone very obviously dislikes me.

    Something is not adding up.

  110. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    At the end of the day I’m partisan, and I think that Churchill was “good” for America.

    Which is pretty much what I was saying. Americans love Churchill because he was bad for Britain (and for the rest of the world) but good for America. I’d imagine that Quisling was much more admired in Germany than he was in Norway.

  111. A123 says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Why are you suspicious?

    Worldwide the vast majority of systematic violence against Christians is at the hands of Muslims. It is so pervasive that every month there is a lengthy write-up needed to simply summarize the worst of Muslim violence against Christians:

    https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17056/persecution-of-christians-january

    At under 1% of the U.S. population and half a globe away from sociopath Khameni’s terrorism funding — Christians in America are doing better resisting Muslim violence than Christians elsewhere.

    Something is not adding up.

    Yes. Pro-terror groups like CAIR wield fake terminology, like Islamophobia, as a scimitar to silence those who tell the TRUTH about Muslim violence against Christians. They believe that you are an uncritical thinker who can be manipulated into serving Muhammad instead of Jesus.

    Prove them wrong…. Defend the followers of Jesus from violence committed in Muhammad’s name. You do not have to be submissive like Pope Francis.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  112. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    Those damned Brits, always interfering with fiery methods of suicide.

    Most were in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu, but on 14 February [2009], another British-based Tamil allegedly tried to set himself on fire outside Downing Street, but was arrested before he could do so.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/feb/19/tamil-suicide-protest-geneva (emphases added)

    • Replies: @Talha
  113. dfordoom says: • Website
    @RSDB

    I think one of dfordoom’s most strongly urged criticisms was that Churchill’s policies decreased the British sphere of influence, which puts the subsequent conversation in an interesting light.

    Yep. The points I was making were that Churchill was not just bad for the non-white subjects of the British Empire, he was bad for the white subjects of that empire as well, and bad for the (white) British people. And Churchill played a major role in destroying the British Empire.

    The people who benefited most from Churchill’s policies were the Americans, which is why @iffen admires him. Apparently in @iffen’s view being a traitor to your own people is a good thing if it serves America’s interests.

    I also attacked Churchill for damaging Australia’s interests and Australians were, you know, white people.

    I defended Neville Chamberlain (and I think you’ll find that Chamberlain was a white man and a European) because I believe he was motivated by concern for the British people and by a desire to do what was right. A difficult balancing act but he did his best.

    • Replies: @iffen
  114. dfordoom says: • Website
    @songbird

    I think the main problem boils done to my civilization is under attack

    Western civilisation is on the offensive across the globe. It is other civilisations (all other civilisations) that are under attack from the West. We are seeing a concerted effort to impose western civilisation on everyone else.

    Western civilisation today is more aggressive than ever before.

    • Replies: @A123
    , @songbird
  115. Talha says:
    @RSDB

    Self-immolators of the world, unite!!! Now is your time!!!

    Peace.

  116. A123 says:
    @dfordoom

    Western civilisation is on the offensive across the globe. It is other civilisations (all other civilisations) that are under attack from the West. We are seeing a concerted effort to impose western civilisation on everyone else.

    Western civilisation today is more aggressive than ever before.

    As someone who believes in traditional American values, like the Protestant Work Ethic, I perceive that my Western Civilization is under attack and on the defensive. Main Street USA does not want what Hollywood & DC are pushing.

    IMHO, it would be better to say that SJW Globalism is aggressive and trying to impose its Elite values on everyone. West, Center, East, wherever…. Sorry if this seems picky, but I find that clear & concise terminology helps communication.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  117. dfordoom says: • Website
    @A123

    Worldwide the vast majority of systematic violence against Christians is at the hands of Muslims.

    Historically the vast majority of systematic violence against Christians has been at the hands of other Christians.

    And Christians have not been at all averse to inflicting systematic violence on non-Christians.

    Christians have been enthusiastic persecutors. Many still would be if they could get away with it.

  118. dfordoom says: • Website
    @A123

    As someone who believes in traditional American values, like the Protestant Work Ethic, I perceive that my Western Civilization is under attack and on the defensive. Main Street USA does not want what Hollywood & DC are pushing.

    IMHO, it would be better to say that SJW Globalism is aggressive and trying to impose its Elite values on everyone. West, Center, East, wherever…. Sorry if this seems picky, but I find that clear & concise terminology helps communication.

    I understand what you’re saying but you’re being naïve. At this point in time western civilisation is SJW Globalism. The kind of western civilisation in which you believe no longer exists.

    We have to face the unpleasant truth that the older model of western civilisation in which you believe was swept away and replaced by a wholly new model.

    To a large extent Main Street USA seems to want exactly what Hollywood & DC are pushing. You’ll find plenty of people from Main Street USA who cheer loudly every time the US war machine is used to impose the new SJW Globalist model of western civilisation on some other nation.

  119. @V. K. Ovelund

    More importantly, Muslims are not insidious, ingratiating, contemptuous and manipulative like a certain other demographic I could name.

    Yes, they are. That’s exactly what Muslims are like. Or did you think that Talha’s preternatural politeness was simply due to a good upbringing?

    In view of our many conversations I remain faithfully your good online friend, but I would cordially suggest that you try noticing a little harder. Muslims are, almost to a fault, very well behaved when to be otherwise would bring unwanted attention. But once they outnumber you, watch out.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    , @dfordoom
  120. @Intelligent Dasein

    Well, Muslims can stand up for themselves. I have not come to defend Islam. One is merely suspicious of the Narrative. That is all.

    I smell bait. (Not by you.)

    Part of my problem was that I had significant numbers each of Chinese and Muslim Arab undergraduates in university courses I taught. I do not pretend that my Arabs made a representative sample of the population in the countries from which they came (I don’t know anything about that), but the contrast between my Arabs and my Chinese was stark. Comparatively, the Chinese were rude and dishonest. I did have an Arab student I suspected of cheating, but only one in ten years; whereas the Chinese cheated all the time.

    The Arab students had the good manners to take their Arabic out in the hall: if an American student was present, they gladly switched to English. The Chinese? No way.

    So, yes, the Arabs made a good impression, which was not what I had expected. If I told you otherwise, I would not be telling the truth.

  121. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Muslims are, almost to a fault, very well behaved when to be otherwise would bring unwanted attention. But once they outnumber you, watch out.

    So they’re just like Christians then? Once Christians became a minority suddenly they were as nice as pie, wouldn’t hurt a fly. Just wanted to join hands and sing Kumbaya.

    But when Christians were a majority they were among the most zealous persecutors who have ever walked the Earth.

    And if you belong to one Christian sect and another Christian sect becomes a majority or gains political power, watch out.

    Has any other religion ever matched the Christian enthusiasm for persecuting?

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  122. @V. K. Ovelund

    To no one in particular:

    Readers are pushing back on my seemingly pro-Muslim post. That’s all right, but you won’t meet much resistance from me. I hold no brief for Islam. All I meant to say was that I had uncritically ingested the same 9/11 propaganda 20 years ago most of the rest of you had ingested.

    I am not a Truther. I have no theory of 9/11 except this: the media that formed my opinion about 9/11 at the time are the same media that, since that time, have lied to me about everything else.

    Few if any of the nonblack Muslims I have met in person since 9/11 fit the caricature.

  123. @anon

    Suggest you read “The Prince” by Nick Machiavelli. Appearances do matter[1].

    Far be it from me to dispute the master!

    Still, I wonder what Machiavelli would say if he lived in our time and place. One doubts that he would counsel Republican congressmen to start in fright every time hostile, mischievous media say, “Boo!”

    [MORE]

    Let me liken it to a thing I know something about.

    As you are probably aware, I was ten years a college instructor, often in classrooms seating 100 undergraduates or more. I learned then that one cannot prevent the occasional disgruntled undergraduate from mocking the instructor outside the classroom. Trying to prevent that, only makes it worse.

    A good instructor adapts to pressure from his students to a certain degree, of course, but keeps the act of adaptation hidden. A smart instructor will usually appear to be imperturbable. Like a rock.

    I am no congressman, so you can take my opinion for what it’s worth; but I suspect that a better way for Ted Cruz to have dealt with bad-faith media would have to been to ignore them in the moment and then to mock and undermine them later. Cruz didn’t do it right.

    • Replies: @anon
  124. anon[112] • Disclaimer says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Still, I wonder what Machiavelli would say if he lived in our time and place.

    Dunno. Maybe we wouldn’t be able to understand a word, because he’d be was laughing all the time?

    One doubts that he would counsel Republican congressmen to start in fright every time hostile, mischievous media say, “Boo!”

    Pretty much. But there’s more.

    Cubo-Canadian Cruz should have thought before he acted. Once he screwed up he should have reframed it differently. He’s a chump suffering from a clue shortage. No wonder fake Hispanic Beta O’Rourke gave him trouble in the 2018 Senate election. And yeah, the airline employees blah and yeah, the release of texts blah and so forth. Probably illegal but so what? Dude’s a GOP Senator, he should have already come to terms with living in an aquarium – anyone can see him any time, and the press is always hostile. Always. He should already know that.

    duh.

    I learned then that one cannot prevent the occasional disgruntled undergraduate from mocking the instructor outside the classroom. Trying to prevent that, only makes it worse.

    Your students didn’t know about ratemyprofessor.com, or you didn’t know about it, or what?

    I suspect that a better way for Ted Cruz to have dealt with bad-faith media would have to been to ignore them in the moment and then to mock and undermine them later.

    Multiple ways he could have reframed. But he was stupid to not think about the optics before acting, as Nick could tell him, because he got put in the defensive crouch so easily.

    Cruz didn’t do it right.

    Yeah, that’s pretty much my whole point. Good we agree.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  125. songbird says:
    @Talha

    I’m not understanding the coherency here; so if you take a vacation to Iran, you shouldn’t criticize the Ottoman Empire’s policies? Why?

    Iran and Turkey are not in the same cultural, linguistic, or political spheres. Nor are they facing history’s largest ever invasion – so why would they care?

    People did not coin the term the “Western Civilization” randomly out of nowhere, but that it was based on tangible and intangible connections between countries. BLM and like movements are very active within Europe – they cross over. If anything discussions on Indians will cross over even more easily.

    \

    They have access to the most relevant data points and why would Brazilians be interested in researching the matter?

    The most politico-ethnic bias – the biggest axe to grind, is how I’d label it.

    You must understand this is not the first time that I have heard these claims. The first time I heard them was from one the most obnoxious people I’ve ever interacted with. Basically, I’d heard the fellow say, in other words but equating to the say thing: “You can’t have a culture anymore because we invaded you. Everything has got to be multiculture now! Starring Indians, like me!”

    OK, but I still don’t know what this has to do with the legitimacy of entertaining an academic discussion about the historic details of the Bengal Famine.

    Well, I suppose one can make the argument that the woke aren’t getting their talking points from Unz – I guess that is a legitimate point.

    • Replies: @Talha
  126. songbird says:
    @dfordoom

    Western civilisation is on the offensive across the globe. It is other civilisations (all other civilisations) that are under attack from the West.

    That’s not the direction genes are moving.

    Nor is the West becoming more European as it declines – it is becoming much less European.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  127. Talha says:
    @songbird

    Iran and Turkey are not in the same cultural, linguistic, or political spheres.

    Only if you wish to dismiss the reality of what has historically been considered the Persianate world:
    http://visitairan.com/persianate-states-and-dynasties/

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    The Ottomans, like the Seljuks and Ghaznavids and others were Persianized Turks. This is fairly well known. Not only has Turkish been greatly influenced by Farsi, the Ottomans used to use titles directly imported from Persian like “Silahdar”. One of the most influential poets in Turkish history is Rumi (ra) who influenced later Turkish poets like Yunus Emre (ra) and so many others. What language did he write in?

    The most politico-ethnic bias – the biggest axe to grind, is how I’d label it.

    And the ones with the most politico-ethnic bias to deny it are the British. It’s a bit like Turks dismissing historical claims by Armenians because they have a political axe to grind. Do you think Turkish claims of we “dindu nuffin” should be seriously by that defense?

    The first time I heard them was from one the most obnoxious people I’ve ever interacted with.

    I’ve heard really obnoxious Armenians make claims against the Turks; doesn’t mean they aren’t true, just means they are being made by some obnoxious person.

    • Replies: @songbird
  128. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    Apparently in @iffen’s view being a traitor to your own people is a good thing if it serves America’s interests.

    Duh!

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  129. @anon

    Your students didn’t know about ratemyprofessor.com, or you didn’t know about it, or what?

    Insofar as the web site to which you refer relates to me approximately as, say, Mother Jones relates to Sen. Cruz, I shall set a good example for the senator by declining further comment.

    Your example was apt. I am glad that you brought it up.

  130. @dfordoom

    This is ridiculous progressive tripe. Please take note of the fact that more people were killed by secularists in the 20th century than in all previous religious wars on Earth combined.

    Besides which, religious wars are not necessarily a bad thing. The truth must fight for itself or it will cede the stage to error. Religious wars are at least about something noble.

    Besides which again, I am not talking about the limp-wristed idea of “religious persecution.” I am talking about Muslim conquest, which is religious in name only (if that).

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  131. anon[116] • Disclaimer says:
    @Yahya K.

    So back to India

    So back to India in 1943. You made a strong claim about Churchill diverting food supplies from India, but didn’t get around to explaining what that meant. Perhaps we can have that serious discussion?

    Are you claiming that a portion of the Indian rice harvest was loaded onto ships and sailed around Africa to England in 1943? Cape of Good Hope rather than the Suez canal, in order to avoid the Italian naval forces still still operating in the Med? Sailing west bound rather than east, because the Imperial Japanese Navy was still a factor in the Eastern Indian Ocean, with I boats on patrol?

    Or are you arguing that Canadian / US wheat shipments that were supposed to be convoyed across the Atlantic and then on to India somehow wound up in England instead?

    Or are you just repeating something someone told you, without bothering to think through the statement? That would be quite lazy just for a start, possibly disingenuous, or even dishonest.

    Maybe you want to revise your remarks, instead?

    • Replies: @Yahya K.
  132. dfordoom says: • Website
    @songbird

    Western civilisation is on the offensive across the globe. It is other civilisations (all other civilisations) that are under attack from the West.

    That’s not the direction genes are moving.

    That’s not much consolation for the people whose cultures are being destroyed by the aggressive onslaughts of western civilisation. That’s not much consolation for the people whose countries get bombed or invaded by the West, or have their governments overthrown by the West. Not much consolation for people whose national, religious and cultural identities are being destroyed by the hyper-aggressiveness of the West.

    Culture matters a lot more to people than genes.

    Do you deny my claim that the current model of western civilisation is on the offensive everywhere? Do you deny that the very western concepts of “freedom and democracy” and liberalism and capitalism are being imposed on non-western civilisations at gunpoint?

    • Replies: @songbird
  133. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    Apparently in @iffen’s view being a traitor to your own people is a good thing if it serves America’s interests.

    Duh!

    You might ask yourself how you’d feel if I said that Benedict Arnold was a great man.

    • LOL: Talha
  134. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Besides which, religious wars are not necessarily a bad thing. The truth must fight for itself or it will cede the stage to error.

    Oh dear God. What we need is a new Thirty Years War. The last one was so awesome.

    You do realise that the people that you think are in error actually believe that they have the truth and that you’re the one in error? Every religious fanatic thinks his own sect has the truth and that everyone else is in error.

    Besides which again, I am not talking about the limp-wristed idea of “religious persecution.” I am talking about Muslim conquest, which is religious in name only (if that).

    Because Christians never conquered anybody. You ever hear of the Teutonic Knights?

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    , @songbird
  135. Yahya K. says:
    @anon

    You made a strong claim about Churchill diverting food supplies from India, but didn’t get around to explaining what that meant. Perhaps we can have that serious discussion?

    Are you claiming that a portion of the Indian rice harvest was loaded onto ships and sailed around Africa to England in 1943? Cape of Good Hope rather than the Suez canal, in order to avoid the Italian naval forces still still operating in the Med? Sailing west bound rather than east, because the Imperial Japanese Navy was still a factor in the Eastern Indian Ocean, with I boats on patrol?

    Or are you arguing that Canadian / US wheat shipments that were supposed to be convoyed across the Atlantic and then on to India somehow wound up in England instead?

    The main issue here has to do with the ability to transport food supplies. More specifically, 66% of food-carrying ships which previously operated in the Indian Ocean were diverted away from the Indian Ocean to the Atlantic during January 1943, on the direct orders of Churchill. This left India incapable of importing critical food supplies from across the Indian Ocean (Australia) during the famine, while correspondingly increasing the UK’s ability to import food from across the Atlantic Ocean. And the main reason for that was the British Government’s prioritization of bolstering its domestic food stockpile, because Churchill wanted an excess reserve in Britain to (a) avoid austerity measures (b) avoid buying food at high prices after the war ended. This decision was made with full warning from various ministries and government officials of the devastating consequences it could (and eventually would) protrude for India. I will present the evidence for this below, which comes from Mukerjee’s book.

    But first, here’s a background summary from Wikipedia of the characters and events leading up to the events below: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943#1942%E2%80%9344:_Refusal_of_imports

    Beginning as early as December 1942, high-ranking government officials and military officers (including John Herbert, the Governor of Bengal; Viceroy Linlithgow; Leo Amery the Secretary of State for India; General Claude Auchinleck, Commander-in-Chief of British forces in India,[214] and Admiral Louis Mountbatten, Supreme Commander of South-East Asia[215]) began requesting food imports for India through government and military channels, but for months these requests were either rejected or reduced to a fraction of the original amount by Churchill’s War Cabinet.[216]

    The main point being that India’s food problems were known as early as Dec 1942. This should be kept in mind when judging Churchill’s decisions thereafter.

    [MORE]

    Jan 2, 1943: Viscount Cherwell (Prof) suggests to the PM that cutting the 90 monthly sailings in the Indian Ocean down to 50, by transferring ships from the Indian Ocean to the Atlantic, would increase the UK’s ability to import food by 1,000,000 tons.

    Thus was born one of Churchill’s most far-reaching decisions. On January 2, 1943, the Prof informed the prime minister that the United Kingdom’s imports would increase by a million tons if the ninety monthly sailings to the east were cut to fifty during January, February, and March; and by 1.25 million tons if the cut were to forty sailings. Moreover, the “gain would be increased to 3½ millions if the cut were prolonged up to the end of June.” (A more nuanced calculation, taking into account the delay in transferring ships from the Indian Ocean to the Atlantic, would find that the last cut actually yielded 2 million tons of imports.)

    January 5: Churchill follows through on the suggestion and slashes the number of ships operating in the Indian Ocean to 44% of previous levels:

    IT WAS TOO late. On January 5, 1943, the prime minister had slashed the number of ships operating in the “Indian Ocean area.” The term, used in connection with wartime shipping, referred to the entire span of water rimmed by Australia, Arabia, and Africa (as well as the British Empire territories and dominions surrounding this composite body of water). The United Kingdom controlled the merchant ships there, whereas the United States ran the Pacific.

    Accordingly, Churchill circled the most drastic, last option, marked it “A,” and wrote on the memo “We must go for A.” Thanks to the Prof, MacDougall’s suggestion to cut Indian Ocean shipping down to 60 percent ended up as an even deeper cut, to 44 percent—and for twice as long.31

    The consequences of such drastic cuts begin to rear their head:

    Combined with the imperative to supply troops in North Africa, the shipping cut meant that very few vessels would be available on the run between Australia and India. The shipping cut “must portend violent changes and perhaps cataclysms in the seaborne trade of large numbers of countries,” the Ministry of War Transport warned the prime minister.32

    As ships gradually left the Indian Ocean, the cessation of trade deranged the economies of the colonies on its rim. They were already reeling from wartime inflation and scarcity, and “the menace of famine suddenly loomed up like a hydra-headed monster with a hundred clamouring mouths,” related C.B.A. Behrens in the official history of wartime British shipping.

    Linlithgow warns of impeding calamity in India and urges the retention of present shipping capacity allocated to India, but the British Government refuses:

    Linlithgow protested that India’s grain reserves were so low as to threaten disaster in the near future. “Rice crisis [inevitable] later in the year and additional shipments of wheat will be essential to help to meet this,” he wrote to Amery on February 21, 1943. “India’s own need is so acute that I must press for retention of all tonnage allocated to us already and repeat that further substantial allocations will be necessary later on.” But on March 2—after hearing a member of the viceroy’s council warn of famine—the shipping committee asserted that “no further diversions of ships from the United Kingdom import programme could be contemplated at present.” 46

    One reason for the decision to divert food-carrying ships to the Atlantic was Churchill’s desire for 19 million tons of reserve stock, despite the MOFs estimate that only 15 million tons were needed.

    Another reason for maintaining large stocks, and the corresponding claim on shipping, was the prime minister’s distaste for austerity. In the summer of 1940, for instance, the Ministry of Food had estimated that it needed 15 million tons of imported food and animal feed each year, but at the urging of Churchill and Cherwell it had asked for almost 19 million tons. British rations would come to include red meats, butter and other fats, cheese, tea, sugar, jam, and other preserves.

    The shipping transferred from the Indian Ocean would add 2 million tons of supplies by the end of the summer. That is, the shipping cut that contributed to the outbreak of famine in Bengal merely added to the margin by which stocks were in excess in Britain.47

    Another reason was financial. Churchill anticipated that food price would rise after the war, so wanted to build up a reserve in the immediate term to avoid the higher prices in the long term:

    After the war, Europe would need large infusions of food, world prices would be high, and for the United Kingdom to be importing food at that time would prove costly. Rather than let domestic food stocks run down as the war turned in the Allies’ favor, in July 1942 Churchill had resolved to build them up by accepting Cherwell’s formula of requiring 27 million tons of civilian imports in 1943.58

    So it was concern about the United Kingdom’s postwar finances, not just about wartime food supply or operational flexibility, that motivated the determination to build domestic stocks by cutting Indian Ocean shipping. In making their decision, the Prof and the prime minister exported as much as possible of Britain’s future economic risk to the colonies—where it precipitated immediate catastrophe.61

    • Thanks: Talha
    • Replies: @iffen
    , @V. K. Ovelund
    , @anon
  136. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    You might ask yourself how you’d feel if I said that Benedict Arnold was a great man.

    I think that I would feel vindicated in thinking that you have an irrational anti-American streak.

    You, a citizen of a fellow settler colony, siding with the oppressive colonial masters against fellow citizens from another settler colony.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @dfordoom
  137. iffen says:
    @Yahya K.

    Well done, Y. K.

    • Agree: Talha
    • Thanks: Yahya K.
  138. @dfordoom

    Because Christians never conquered anybody. You ever hear of the Teutonic Knights?

    Have you not reminded us that the trouble with us Americans is that, rather than taking a practical approach, we’re always off on some fool’s crusade?

    So here is a practical approach: in the present context, the Teutonic Knights were on my side.

    (To avoid muddying the issue: I believe that ID’s point, unlike mine, regards error, where—as is usual with ID—the term is taken in its older, purer sense.)

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  139. @Yahya K.

    I take the side of European whites because I am one, but had been unaware of the famine and, thus, appreciate the history lesson.

    The lesson seems significant:

    The main issue here has to do with the ability to transport food supplies. More specifically, 66% of food-carrying ships which previously operated in the Indian Ocean were diverted away from the Indian Ocean to the Atlantic during January 1943, on the direct orders of Churchill. This left India incapable of importing critical food supplies from across the Indian Ocean (Australia) during the famine….

    1. One should not want one’s country to be ruled by foreigners.
    2. One should not want one’s country to be dependent on imports.

    • Agree: Yahya K.
    • Replies: @songbird
  140. Talha says:
    @iffen

    Bro, the Aussies are still loyal to the crown. Technically, the Queen is still the official head of state. She’s still on their currency:

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
  141. songbird says:
    @dfordoom

    Do you deny my claim that the current model of western civilisation is on the offensive everywhere? Do you deny that the very western concepts of “freedom and democracy” and liberalism and capitalism are being imposed on non-western civilisations at gunpoint?

    The political sphere is not so much a scion as it is a cancerous outgrowth, at best.

    And I’m afraid military adventurism, as opprobrious as it is, is not much of a differentiator, unless at scale. Everyone with the capability engages in it more or less. Russia does. Iran does. India certainly has at times. China has.

  142. songbird says:
    @Talha

    There’s a strong undercurrent of Indian revanchism present in the West today. It can be observed in almost countless individuals. Professor Priyamvada Gopal who tweeted “white lives don’t matter” (in England). Sadiq Khan who commissioned a brown fist fireworks display over London during New Year’s. Ash Sarkar who reviewing disturbing demographic data out of England said “We are winning, lads!” Some believe that the grooming scandals are just another part of this.

    There are millions of Indians in Europe today in visible numbers spanning from Ireland in the West to Poland in the East. Quite a bit more than there were ever Europeans in India, and what is more, they seem to have both the capacity and inclination to keep coming.

    From what I’ve read of Indian history, I don’t believe Indians were very tolerant of attempts by the British to rule them, so I don’t see why Europeans should be any more tolerant, under what I would consider worse provocation.

    When an argument is made by revanchists, in that context, it becomes a revanchist argument, regardless of who originated it, the intent of the individual making it, or its merits or demerits. And it seems obvious to me that any argument that seeks victimhood in the modern world is ultimately about status, in the greater social context.

    Such accusations could be disarmed, of course. It would require the debate to begin with a preface about India’s population today, and the medium estimate of its historical high, before colonization. Or perhaps the number of metric tons of food aid shipped to India by Europeans. Arguably, those numbers are more relevant to the formation of modern India, and debating them would be interesting and involve many layers, but I have never heard an Indian bring them up, as interesting as the questions appear to me. I can only suppose it is because it would not confer status.

    • Replies: @RSDB
  143. anon[846] • Disclaimer says:
    @Yahya K.

    Thanks for a comprehensive answer. That is useful.

    • Thanks: Yahya K.
  144. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    You might ask yourself how you’d feel if I said that Benedict Arnold was a great man.

    I think that I would feel vindicated in thinking that you have an irrational anti-American streak.

    You certainly have an irrational defensive streak. I was aiming my criticism at Winston Churchill, not America. If Churchill had sold his country out to the French or some other foreign power my criticism would still stand. He damaged the interests of his own people and his own country, for the sake of a foreign power. Isn’t that what an American would say Benedict Arnold did?

    Congratulations for missing the point so comprehensively.

  145. dfordoom says: • Website
    @V. K. Ovelund

    So here is a practical approach: in the present context, the Teutonic Knights were on my side.

    It doesn’t whose side you think they were on. They were Christians imposing Christianity by conquest, which is what ID assured us was something that only Muslims do.

  146. songbird says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Suppose India had been independent. Would it have had a more impressive fleet than China, at that time? It strikes me, that there is no possible way that they would have. Ergo, they would not have been able to go toe-to-toe with Japan and convoy grain ships from Australia or the US. And so the famine would have happened anyway. In fact, it probably would have been worse, as it is doubtful that its transportation networks would have been as developed.

  147. songbird says:
    @dfordoom

    Every religious fanatic thinks his own sect has the truth and that everyone else is in error.

    This is not a problem with Christianity or religion per se, but with breaking from orthodoxy and hierarchy. It was not many years after Martin Luther nailed his theses that a sex cult took over Munster.

    Actually, the Reformation involved pretty radical social changes – like vastly increased literacy, so in some ways it was the origin of modernism, rather than a reflection of the history of Christianity or its true character.

  148. RSDB says:
    @songbird

    Priyamvada Gopal

    As I recall, she also tweeted out “Brahmin lives don’t matter”, and I can assure you that she is read in India, which is another country where English is the language of the elite. Does this mean that the discussion of sati some commenters engaged in was also some sort of aggression?

    [MORE]

    From what I’ve read of Indian history, I don’t believe Indians were very tolerant of attempts by the British to rule them

    I don’t know what you’ve read of Indian history or what you haven’t, but, as usual with a government of foreign origin, there are two sides to this. Enlistment in the British Indian Army during WWII was extremely high, making it perhaps the largest volunteer army in history; on the other side you had things like the Quit India campaign. As far as I recall, you were Irish or Irish-American; you should be familiar with this pattern.

    Anyway, these are quibbles; I’m not sure I understand your main point; I understand, and substantially agree, with the idea that we should be generally somewhat suspicious of postcolonial historiography, as it approaches these sorts of matters from a very clearly biased standpoint, but I don’t understand at all the idea that we shouldn’t discuss history at all if it involves the possibility of some British policy or the actions of some British figure having deadly results.

    I see you are not averse to discussing negative outcomes of the Reformation (I would also imagine, though I don’t know, that you would not be averse to discussing negative aspects of Cromwell’s rule, or Churchill’s role in forming the Auxies); doesn’t this cast aspersion on the Protestant state religion of the United Kingdom, the foundation of the United States in a mostly Protestant religious context, or the current Southern Baptists, whose religion is historically linked to that of the Anabaptists of Muenster?

  149. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    I’m beginning to be suspicious of your loyalty; iirc, you were wearing a CANADIAN jersey in the last picture you posted of yourself.

    [MORE]

    My relatives in Toronto gave me a sweater with “CANADA” across it in giant letters; I’m always somewhat hesitant about wearing it out, but at least it’s better than the shirt I have which has a picture of a tiger and the words “Advice from a tiger” and “Expand your territory”; I’ll be arrested if I ever set foot in Sri Lanka with that one, international incident or no international incident.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Your comment will appear after approval from the schoolmarm. Racial slurs, dehumanizing language, personal identifying information, spamming, the advocation of illegal activity, or excessive profanity will not be approved. Approval of a comment does not imply endorsement of its contents by the authors of this blog or by The Unz Review.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS